General > Discussion
Tiny poll about what do actually contributing mean
krilain:
--- Quote from: Anarch Cassius on January 14, 2013, 10:03:52 pm ---(...)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.
(...)
--- End quote ---
:D
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:
--- Quote from: Anarch Cassius on January 14, 2013, 10:35:47 pm ---(...)
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.
(...)
--- End quote ---
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:
--- Quote from: H-Hour on January 17, 2013, 10:30:48 pm ---Have you gotten more results since you posted the results image? Care to post an update?
--- End quote ---
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.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version