Tiny poll about what do actually contributing mean

[krilain]

Hello,

I don't know if it is of any interest for the largest number (it would require a poll to know that!) but I heard about poll in another topic and slowly the idea was born for me to (try to) make some about the "contributing" question.

I could'nt do it with the forum tool because here is involved multiple questions. So I took some of my day to make it as a dedicated page. Here is the link : http://krillpoll.jigsy.com/.

I hoped I could get some of you curious enougth to take a look at this poll. If enough people participate I'd make a summary chart here as soon as relevant (there is already an automated chart generated there, but not including the whole poll).

Let me know what you think anyway.

[geever]

I read through the poll (haven't yet filled) and I have to say the good it started the bad it ended. It feels like you got tired when writing it. The second half of the questions is degraded to a) black b) white which isn't good (even if black/white are not refer too good/bad but other opposites).

I also have to mention that the fact that the game is released under GNU GPL v2+ doesn't make it a GNU project neither have any connections between them. Also GNU isn't equal with Open Source Software either, so question 9 is simply silly (which is another black or white one anyway).

I hope you get my note as a constructive criticism as intended.

-geever

[krilain]

Thanks Geever you for those clever remarks. That's all of great interest. And thanks for the people who filled anyway this imperfect form.

I would even answer you more in detail.  You are right when you say that binary answers are poorly significant. The fact that I had to try many webpolls providers and got finally tired to test may be a reason. But at least I can now improve the content with the help of the first results and comments.

Then about the GNU question. It is in fact very difficult to get exactly what it is about in general because it can be used for so many things. Just for the fun, I released this poll itself under GNU GPL, so that I should name you the first contributor to this project

Ok, but you pushed forward some very good questions. In fact that's difficult to distinguish between a GNU project and a GNU software. It is also not immediate to see when a software released under GNU is not at all opensource, or is so but under a restricted meaning. I think about what happened to Openoffice. I didn't understand exactly how, but now only LibreOffice, a fork, remains GNU in its unrestricted meaning.

I will watch about changing the binary questions. Good night.

[Sandro]

You have got GNU and GPL mixed up (as was intended by mr. Stallman, I guess).

[Anarch Cassius]

GNU is an organization, a Unix-like operating system, and the name of a license put out by the GNU organization. GNU GPL is the license in question.

Free software is a term GNU people like to use instead of open source, it has a slightly more specific meaning but all "free software" is a subset of "open source" software. The differences are minor aside from connotations of the word.

OpenOffice is free and open source. It's main branch is controlled by Oracle though, OpenLibre is a community run fork. It would be like if a bunch of people wanted self-bandaging so badly they forked UFO:AI and made UFO:Self-Med and maintained it themselves. That would be totally unnecessary with UFO because of the modding options of course but you get the idea.

UFO:AI has nothing to do with GNU except using the GPL license, at least that I know of.

[krilain]

(...)OpenOffice is free and open source. It's main branch is controlled by Oracle though, OpenLibre is a community run fork. It would be like if a bunch of people wanted self-bandaging so badly they forked UFO:AI and made UFO:Self-Med and maintained it themselves.
(...)

I must admit I've thought into myself recently that self-bandaging will finally come only with UFOAI 2 .

About GNU GPL it is all clear now. But there is also the fact that UFOAI is a stocked at sourceforge which itself seems to tell that the licence is obviously GNU GPL and version 3 if I dont mistake, which is the last one. But here it is probably not exactly so simple - many gpl versions exist, many other licences for free softwares too.

About the poll, I updated it. I will have to publish the very last results of the last version now. Then what to say about the new version. No more binary questions as promished, but looks very heavy now and maybe discouraging, I dont know.

[Anarch Cassius]

Like I said you can just do a mod. 2.5 supports modding and if it's as flexible as Quake2's was you'll be able to make nearly anything without having to maintain a totally separate branch.

The most confusing thing I've seen is software that is both GPL AND commercial. The way it works is that nothing in the GPL prevents the original creator from using the stuff for other purposes. So you can either get it under GPL and have the obligation to keep your project "free software" (you could charge but wouldn't be able to prevent redistribution) or you can pay for a commercial license.

[krilain]

(...)
The most confusing thing I've seen is software that is both GPL AND commercial. The way it works is that nothing in the GPL prevents the original creator from using the stuff for other purposes. So you can either get it under GPL and have the obligation to keep your project "free software" (you could charge but wouldn't be able to prevent redistribution) or you can pay for a commercial license.
(...)

Yes, of course. I've met some licence text where it is said that you can charge the software if you distribute it up to more than 100 units.

Isn't it how does some Linux distributions work finally? Like the Red Hat that if I remember well was affordable when you get it as a CD. Of course with today generalized downloading that's another story.

Moreover there are many other ways to make commercial business around free sotwares. Not to speak about sharewares which had their own system that calls for volunteers, you can charge anyway the hot-line service, or the books/ebooks (I often see some Blender books sold in bookstores), or sell some goodies.

About UFO-AI, I would really think possible to sell goodies. You know, the 3-characters figurine shown at loading page could make a nice figurine - directed to collectors and fans. Ogre sells t-shirts and mugs you know

http://thor.nexva.com/product_visuals/production/8d6313d9838b3164386ef6bcda671881.png

[H-Hour]

Have you gotten more results since you posted the results image? Care to post an update?

[krilain]

Have you gotten more results since you posted the results image? Care to post an update?

Not very more.

I've only one vote I have actually to include which has been produced just when I made the screencopy. That's for the first version of the poll.

But since I'd changed for a more verbose one I've got nothing very significant. I think that this second version looks very hard. I will have to simplify all of this maybe.

Anyway I will wait until sunday to take stock of the situation. Thanks for your awareness, let me know if you have got any idea, some details could be relevant.

[krilain]

Here is the new results. Thanks for the comprehensive comments left (Anarc in particular who was verbose enough to make it useful, and Wolf also). The poll remains open.

[H-Hour]

Thanks krilain. Too bad there weren't very many respondents.

[homunculus]

other than some useless translation contributions the only thing i have done is a hud that goes against the intentions of the real developers in that it enables dragging a grenade from belt to hand in battlescape.
so, how would i answer that poll, like a black sheep?

unwillingness to develop it (or anything else) further comes from:
1) lack of user feedback about the soldier numbers not corresponding to numbers on keyboard (and i don't know if this matters at all, it doesn't for me), or the team panel not reducing its size for a smaller team (less than 5) if a larger team has been used (more than 4).
so, from that i derive that in ufo:ai forum it is nearly impossible to get even the most simple feedback (constructive criticism).
2) learning the ui scripting language does not seem to help me in any other field. i better learn wesnoth scripting, because i get a glimpse of how some scripts work that can be useful in rl. to my knowledge, ufo:ai scripts live more in their own world with their own standards than wesnoth scripts. and, add to that the trouble from some confuncs being called twice when once would be enough, and the confunc that provides the wounds info was called about five times when a soldier with one wound was selected (at least at the time that i scripted).

this might have sounded extremely negative, but really i have a lot of other things to do, and some things failing is natural and there is no need to feel bitter about a failure now and then.

[krilain]

Thanks krilain. Too bad there weren't very many respondents.

Thanks.
This will give some time for polish it.

other than some useless translation contributions the only thing i have done is a hud that goes against the intentions of the real developers in that it enables dragging a grenade from belt to hand in battlescape.
so, how would i answer that poll, like a black sheep?

Eheh, I can imagine the accidents if you release the grenade by error while dragging it.
Anyway, if you see a question that you would have agreed to answer, let me know, I will take care of making additions accordingly.

unwillingness to develop it (or anything else) further comes from:
1)
2)
this might have sounded extremely negative, but really i have a lot of other things to do, and some things failing is natural and there is no need to feel bitter about a failure now and then.

I hear you. But the code remains open so there is always the possibility to make a change by yourself. I've often read a sentence that I've found convincing. The active developpers often say : make it yourself, if it is good, it will be integrated. It means by there, if you failed on the ticket side, you still have a second chance by hand.

[homunculus]

"Eheh, I can imagine the accidents if you release the grenade by error while dragging it."
it would snap back to its original position, as in the inventory window.
with that joke out of the way, back to business:

no, it was not about getting my hud integrated in mainline (huh, i was going somewhat against mainline policies as far as i understand), it was about getting criticism to direct further development (like prioritizing).

the feedback from before the hud was completed (mostly MCR, and some devs) was often useful (except the purely motivational feedback, but i cannot blame people who don't know me), but when it was completed and the feedback would have been most precise and useful there was total silence.

i did get mouse wheel support included more than it used to be in mainline huds, and that was the original point, so it was success in that way.
but developing this particular hud turned out to be a feedback failure.

some questions could be (hidden in the previous post in a less obvious way):
do you get benefits from contributing to ufo:ai in other fields in rl?
do you get useful feedback even if what you do is crap?

like i tried a campaign in wesnoth, and got constructive negative feedback, the result of which was improvement of the campaign, and also a considerable increase in my writing skills which was useful in real life.