Google earth to google PS

[juggalo10101]

yeah, now that im thinking about it parchment would be good, i might not be able to do this though because i got the map to show up on the screen,(just a blank map to test) and there are major errors going on, but i can try to fix it!

[stfrn]

I just wanna say a little thing to the people saying that it would ruin the game for them. It is for YOU that it would ruin the game. If you reckon it would do so for you, well it is VERY simple, simply DO NOT use that program. If you think that it is cheating, DO NOT use the program, if you think that it is like a map (and they exist all the cultures around the real world in some sort of a form) well use it.

As a game master, such a program would ruin the game for me. As a developer, it would ruin the game I am making for others. So if I caught anyone using such a program, I might give them a warning for cheating, but using an external program is grounds for removal.

The arts are meaningless without the client and the client is meaningless without the arts. They're always released together in the same package and need to fit the same version. Of couse the copyright holder can give (written) special exceptions, but it's not the case yet because the raw GPL is used. Currently if someone would release the client :
 - he must use a world with contacts about PS's ones because the client hard code some PS rules
 - he must release his arts in GPL.

It's different for the server, because there is no binary package of it.

Untrue. The client is seperate because you can download from cvs a fully gpl'ed client and server that contain no arts. The client should work on the laanx server, but every model would be a cube, and all the landscape would be, well... nothing. The art is part of the binary package and avaialble via updates because it is part of the game atmosphere that artists have built. But the art is given to you only under lisence and if you disagree you must delete it. The rules aren't given to you at all.

The art is sepereate because you can open most of it in genereic graphics or sound programs. The models are all simple crystalspace models.

see also this thread: http://hydlaa.com/smf/index.php?topic=23915.0

[narita]

Sure, you can download a GPL piece of source which does... nothing. But you can also download a binary package with a GPL thing linked with a non GPL-compatible module to make the whole stuff work.

[Bereror]

Narita,

There might be a language problem, but module for me as a software developer is a piece of software, like a .dll file on Windows or .so file on Linux. There is no closed source module in Planeshift that is required to make the GPL version fully functional. The binary package is built from the same GPL sources from the CVS repository. Also the server on Laanx is built from the same CVS sources.

Planeshift as a game is not under the GPL license. The game engine is. The game engine is used to make it possible to run the Planeshift game, but it can be used to run any other games. Just make your own art, rules and settings, and you have a new game.

[Gottri]

Hi all.

First, I have to admit that I love the idea. Then, respecting the devs and GMs opinions seems of the utmost importance to me.

I'll try to explain a bit.

I have big issues with finding my way in games. Friends of mine got good laughs watching me trying to play Descent some years ago. I got lost very quickly in the smallest levels.

On the other hand, some people have a vision of a game and spend their time building it for us. The least we can do is avoid doing something they disagree with.

So, it's a dead end ? I don't think so. If I wouldn't agree with trying to build a mapping system against the will of the people who work on the game, I believe we can try and convince them. Don't start coding something that go against their beliefs. Write specifications, discuss them with players and people from the project, and when you get something mostly everybody agrees upon ... you can code it.

So, what would I put in such a system ?

- cartography skill (maybe you can't draw som protion of a map, or get it wrong ... and if you don't want to get maps, don't train !)
- fog of war (you can map only what you've seen)
- evolutivity (some places may have changed since your last map ... is this world unstable ?)
- points of interest (for real people with a bad memory ... after all, why would they be disadvantaged when people unable to use a sword are not ?)

Would that make everyone agree ?

Marc a.k.a. Gottri

[corvus_crow]

I think randomization will have to be done over time, or at least switching things around.

I personally think that would ruin the game. It's quite OOC if you think about it. the real world doesn't "randomize" 

I do not agree with that. Boundaries change, countries change names, building are torn down and new ones built, they change road names, place names, et cetera. Now, the shape of the North American continent doesn't change very quickly, and the general placement of a city doesn't either, but when I suggested randomizing things I mean just enough to render inappropriately shared spoiler data useless. The devs have been very forthcoming about posting what one is allowed to do with game data. One can argue with me as much as you like, but the real world does "randomize" and if people are going to do things completely against the license that they have been granted ... then you have do work it out with the devs. I am but an incidental ...

*edit*

I just wanna say a little thing to the people saying that it would ruin the game for them. It is for YOU that it would ruin the game. If you reckon it would do so for you, well it is VERY simple, simply DO NOT use that program. If you think that it is cheating, DO NOT use the program, if you think that it is like a map (and they exist all the cultures around the real world in some sort of a form) well use it.
When stealing will be in the game, would everyone be obliged to use it? I don't think so, well it is the same with "spoilers" and especially, "google yliakum"

For the randomnisation of the places where map are, this would be just about impossible to do and totally useless. Image a newcomer going to Oja following there instructions "From the hydlaa Plaza, go under a "house-bridge" and you get in the Library section, continue on that road, pass the gate near the guards and you are on Ojaroad!" And after, when he finally comes to the end of the trip, he realises that it isn't Oja. I must say that this wouldn't be very pleasing.

You are speaking of a system that will totally change the way the game works for people using that system, and for anybody who chooses not to use it. You seem to be arguing about some vague concept of a "right" that you have to a map. This game is under control of the developers who determine the license by which we use the data.

It wouldn't be very pleasing to have everything changing. Nor would it be pleasing if I was a developer and everybody started ripping off my materials and doing anything they wanted to with him. Especially after I have put all my time and effort into releasing an open source version of the engine for anybody to muck around with how they choose. If you ignore the wishes of the developer community that owns PS, then be prepared to be displeased. Once again, I am incidental, and my viewpoints are taken directly from the policy posts by the developers concerning this game.

Not to mention: Nobody has explained how they will get the map data out of PS. I do not think it is possible without abusing the license to the client. So the question is: Where is the data coming from? Is somebody going to manually take notes while running around the PS server and then transfer them into some kind of data file for Google?

Please avoid posting two or more successive posts before others have replied. Just edit your last post to add new information. Thanks! --Karyuu

[miadon]

wouldn't know how you would do it anyway, planshift isn't one big round ball, its a large cone with different levels and tunnels that lead to the outside world.

[narita]

There might be a language problem, but module for me as a software developer is a piece of software, like a .dll file on Windows or .so file on Linux. There is no closed source module in Planeshift that is required to make the GPL version fully functional. The binary package is built from the same GPL sources from the CVS repository. Also the server on Laanx is built from the same CVS sources.

Arts are also pieces of the software, even if they're not compilable in C++. Don't release them within the game package if they are useless to make the software to work. See for example the GPL FAQ about merging incompatible licences with GPL, http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLModuleLicense

Planeshift as a game is not under the GPL license.

Then, it must not containt any GPL part.

[Xordan]

There might be a language problem, but module for me as a software developer is a piece of software, like a .dll file on Windows or .so file on Linux. There is no closed source module in Planeshift that is required to make the GPL version fully functional. The binary package is built from the same GPL sources from the CVS repository. Also the server on Laanx is built from the same CVS sources.

Arts are also pieces of the software, even if they're not compilable in C++. Don't release them within the game package if they are useless to make the software to work. See for example the GPL FAQ about merging incompatible licences with GPL, http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLModuleLicense

Planeshift as a game is not under the GPL license.

Then, it must not containt any GPL part.

We've had our licensing checked over by legal people, and also by the head of the FSF in Italy I believe, and it's fine I can also point out well known projects like Cedega which has some GPL code along with proprietary code, which we don't even have. We can release whatever art under whatever license we like along with the program which is all GPL code. As another example, does every piece of art created using the GIMP have to be GPL I think not. As long as it isn't _needed_ to run the program aka depended upon by the program, then everything is fine.

[narita]

Whatsoever the consistance of your licence set, jurists would tell you it's harmless for you because you won't sue yourself. But you are able to sue someone releasing a package with parts of your engine and no-GPL arts.
Except of this,
 - Cedega is not released with non compatible licenced software. The user has to compile and link himself.
 - The work you do with a tool (like Gimp) is not covered by the tool's copyright.

[jorrit]

Sure, you can download a GPL piece of source which does... nothing. But you can also download a binary package with a GPL thing linked with a non GPL-compatible module to make the whole stuff work.

Actually the GPL doesn't allow that. You can't link GPL stuff with things that are not GPL compatible.

Greetings,

[jorrit]

Planeshift as a game is not under the GPL license.

Then, it must not containt any GPL part.

That's not true. It is legal for GPL programs to load non-GPL data. i.e. many other GPL programs are used to create or use non-GPL stuff (like the GPL C compiler, Blender, GIMP, ...). It is only illegal for GPL programs to link with non-GPL compatible libraries. But that is something that PS doesn't do.

Greetings,

[jorrit]

Whatsoever the consistance of your licence set, jurists would tell you it's harmless for you because you won't sue yourself. But you are able to sue someone releasing a package with parts of your engine and no-GPL arts.

That's nonsense. The GPL specifically allows usage with non GPL data. i.e. GPL even allows commercial usage. The GPL is *only* concerned about linking code. The GPL doesn't cover the data used by a program. It is totally unrelated and you can't sue someone from using GPL code with other non GPL data.

Greetings,

[narita]

That's not true. It is legal for GPL programs to load non-GPL data. i.e. many other GPL programs are used to create or use non-GPL stuff (like the GPL C compiler, Blender, GIMP, ...). It is only illegal for GPL programs to link with non-GPL compatible libraries. But that is something that PS doesn't do.

It's legal to link, load, create or what anything else for private use, and I've told the copyright owner of the tool you use don't own the work you do with that tool. It's not legal to distribute stuff with two incompatible distribution licences.

Please, read a bit. It's not even legal to package GPL software with GFDL documentation of the software because the licences are not compatible, don't tell me the PS jurists found the way to distribute GPL and proprietary stuff in the same software.

The GPL is about to share things, not only to link executable C++ code with another C++ piece of code.

[jorrit]

That's not true. It is legal for GPL programs to load non-GPL data. i.e. many other GPL programs are used to create or use non-GPL stuff (like the GPL C compiler, Blender, GIMP, ...). It is only illegal for GPL programs to link with non-GPL compatible libraries. But that is something that PS doesn't do.

It's legal to link, load, create or what anything else for private use, and I've told the copyright owner of the tool you use don't own the work you do with that tool. It's not legal to distribute stuff with two incompatible distribution licences.

Can you show me where the GPL says that please?

Greetings,