PDA

View Full Version : Public Engine3 without time restrictions



Vlada
04-19-2015, 09:51 AM
Public Engine3 without time restrictions

April 2015
The SWGEmu Staff



Public Engine3 without time restrictions


In an attempt to prevent further fragmentation of SWG community and to ensure that everything is free and available to everyone, SWGEmu is ready to remove any time restrictions from our Engine3 for all those that go open source and make all their stuff available to any and all SWG Emulator communities. Further more we are changing the license of Core3 to AGPL as well, which in turn will force everyone using our code to either go open source or stop using our code.


We are already in the process of setting things up, more details on how to apply and obtain time restrictions free Engine3 will be posted in following weeks.


We are all here because we love this game, so lets make SWG happen, together. Free SWG for everyone, everywhere.


DISCLAIMER: Core3 license is likely to change after 1.0 open-source release.


~ The SWGEmu Staff

Avior
04-19-2015, 10:58 AM
Awesome..........

Lasko
04-19-2015, 11:40 AM
Love this...... Real open source.....

If more people pull on the same rope, all the better:)

Vlada
04-19-2015, 11:41 AM
Love this...... Real open source.....

If more people pull on the same rope, all the better:)


That's the general idea.

nee2earth
04-19-2015, 11:41 AM
If more people pull on the same rope, all the better

Only if all people are pulling in the same direction.

I still have faith in our Community though.

Lasko
04-19-2015, 12:03 PM
Only if all people are pulling in the same direction.

I still have faith in our Community though.

So do I.

I'm guessing your doing this so you can at least get some momentum in the same direction.

Might need some managing as to the direction your hoping for people to pull in. Requests, info, questions and real management......Help (not teaching). Or at least dialogue.

Your dangling the biggest carrot to make this work. I hope people can see that and respond accordingly.....I will.

SLiFeR
04-19-2015, 12:03 PM
This is a great announcement. Big shout out to the SWGEMU team for this decision. Long live SWG!

Dialgo
04-19-2015, 12:05 PM
Real smart move. Good job guys!

Livy2K
04-19-2015, 12:41 PM
People who believe this is to benefit private server development are delusional :)


Forcing, not asking, peoples work to suddenly become open source seems alot to ask especially since some of those servers have been around for years.


Considering how many projects have used leaked source as feature boosters, which is readily available as many of you know, Im not sure why making servers like bloodfin go open source would benefit anyone.

dedaskalion
04-19-2015, 12:53 PM
They were fun while they lasted.

IxeStarwind
04-19-2015, 01:50 PM
People who believe this is to benefit private server development are delusional :)


Forcing, not asking, peoples work to suddenly become open source seems alot to ask especially since some of those servers have been around for years.


Considering how many projects have used leaked source as feature boosters, which is readily available as many of you know, I'm not sure why making servers like bloodfin go open source would benefit anyone.


I agree , while this is a good idea overall , how will this be enforced? it could bring negative attention to the project if you try to force it . the implications of this are deep for sure... I'm glad it was done though , maybe DEV things will go a bit faster now.

TheAnswer
04-19-2015, 01:53 PM
I agree , while this is a good idea overall , how will this be enforced? it could bring negative attention to the project if you try to force it . the implications of this are deep for sure... I'm glad it was done though , maybe DEV things will go a bit faster now.

Legal actions, where applicable.

PD: The license change is not retro-active, code released prior to the license change is still under GPL and not AGPL

Scurby
04-19-2015, 02:23 PM
This is such a huge positive for the community as a whole.

It 'forces' us all to have better information.
It 'forces' us all to have better communication.
It 'forces' us all to use the most stable code.
It 'forces' us all to examine post-1.0 features and a way to make those available to any server that wants them.

It also enables us to come together and help each other in a way that should always have been there. So many great minds out there doing great things. So many new and creative ones that need fostered and encouraged. And we could all us a bit of help from time to time.

My question is.. who doesn't want to see this finished? I do. I wanna play!!!

Today is just the first step. Still a lot to be done. Forums, guides, communication channels and contacts...

Livy2K
04-19-2015, 02:31 PM
What about the risk of the project potentially pulling from this new open source pool from private servers only to find out later down the line it was originally ripped from leaked source code?

TheAnswer
04-19-2015, 02:39 PM
What about the risk of the project potentially pulling from this new open source pool from private servers only to find out later down the line it was originally ripped from leaked source code?

IANAL but I think if such a thing would happen the code would need to be reverted, and the original commiter would be liable of code theft.

We will be drafting a CLA(contributor license agreement) soon for new commits, like many other open source projects have, to protect the project from this kind of actions.

Livy2K
04-19-2015, 02:50 PM
Thanks for taking the time to reply and clarify those concerns TA.

Kevdo
04-19-2015, 03:30 PM
Seems this was well thought out. The team has my support.

acidanarchy
04-19-2015, 05:07 PM
for all those that go open source and make all their stuff available to any and all SWG Emulator communities. Further more we are changing the license of Core3 to AGPL as well, which in turn will force everyone using our code to either go open source or stop using our code.

I'm happy to see this change come for the greater good of the community but I'm more curious as to the "why" that seems to be at the ground level and heart of the issue. Don't get me wrong, I support everything you folks do but I'm afraid that the enforcement side of this change may end up breaking the bank. Every penny is important for the project and it would be a shame to see it wasted in legal fees. As well, I see this as having potential to take people away from important project tasks over non-official code that's likely 99% irrelevant to the roadmap of SWGEmu in general and in most cases poorly coded by an amateur programmer. I can understand this move if there's some major advancement on a Core3-run server that may contribute to the "vanilla" goal, but for those servers who are just running "vanilla" Core3 it sounds like an unnecessary step that will only further consume the very valuable time of the SWGEmu staff that have more important things to work on.

There's obviously more details that we'll need to review after the terms and conditions are released, but for those who may be wondering I'm curious if there's any specifics behind this. If SWGEmu is focused on vanilla then why would there be any care about servers that are running some self-developed content that falls outside the scope of "vanilla". Why waste any effort to have the community that's using the open source make available the open source which everyone already has?

If "Server A", for example, is running Core3 unmodified, why waste the time and effort to review the "Server A" code when it's known that it's just the same Core3 everyone else has.

If "Server B" which is running the "vanilla" Core3 happens to implement code that, for example, automatically flags all players on the server as Special Forces upon login, is that something that is really of interest to SWGEmu and it's "vanilla" roadmap?

What if "Server C" decides to develop it's own 3D model and implement it on their server, does that 3D model now have to be open source? What if it's a 3D model that the people of "Server C" paid someone else to create?

What if "Server D" paid a 3rd party to develop and program a specific feature for their server, does that code now have to be open source?

Is there any consideration over server security where possible exploits or critical issues may exist?


Thanks for the time and consideration in responding to my post. Cheers


note: just for clarification purposes, I'm fairly certain I know the "why" behind this but I'm more so asking these questions for those who likely won't ask them publicly.

Valkyra
04-19-2015, 06:24 PM
Great job TA! This is a step forward in my opinion, especially now at places like CUEmu and other forks of SWGEmu that use Core3, and don't mind being open source.

I can foresee this could cause problems for people who want to have their source updated but closed off for implementation ingame feature reasons (like a private server that has additional features not found in Core3 right now), but we'll see how TA handles it.

Halyn
04-19-2015, 06:34 PM
I'm rather excited about this - when I saw the license changes in the RSS feed, I had planned on asking about it when the last week of patch notes were posted, but you guys are and away exceeded my expectations. This is great!

Vlada
04-19-2015, 06:35 PM
I'm happy to see this change come for the greater good of the community but I'm more curious as to the "why" that seems to be at the ground level and heart of the issue. Don't get me wrong, I support everything you folks do but I'm afraid that the enforcement side of this change may end up breaking the bank. Every penny is important for the project and it would be a shame to see it wasted in legal fees. As well, I see this as having potential to take people away from important project tasks over non-official code that's likely 99% irrelevant to the roadmap of SWGEmu in general and in most cases poorly coded by an amateur programmer. I can understand this move if there's some major advancement on a Core3-run server that may contribute to the "vanilla" goal, but for those servers who are just running "vanilla" Core3 it sounds like an unnecessary step that will only further consume the very valuable time of the SWGEmu staff that have more important things to work on.

There's obviously more details that we'll need to review after the terms and conditions are released, but for those who may be wondering I'm curious if there's any specifics behind this. If SWGEmu is focused on vanilla then why would there be any care about servers that are running some self-developed content that falls outside the scope of "vanilla". Why waste any effort to have the community that's using the open source make available the open source which everyone already has?

If "Server A", for example, is running Core3 unmodified, why waste the time and effort to review the "Server A" code when it's known that it's just the same Core3 everyone else has.

If "Server B" which is running the "vanilla" Core3 happens to implement code that, for example, automatically flags all players on the server as Special Forces upon login, is that something that is really of interest to SWGEmu and it's "vanilla" roadmap?

What if "Server C" decides to develop it's own 3D model and implement it on their server, does that 3D model now have to be open source? What if it's a 3D model that the people of "Server C" paid someone else to create?

What if "Server D" paid a 3rd party to develop and program a specific feature for their server, does that code now have to be open source?

Is there any consideration over server security where possible exploits or critical issues may exist?


Thanks for the time and consideration in responding to my post. Cheers


note: just for clarification purposes, I'm fairly certain I know the "why" behind this but I'm more so asking these questions for those who likely won't ask them publicly.

These are all valid questions and while I understand your concerns, you will have to be patient while we work on specifics. All necessary details will be posted in following weeks.

acidanarchy
04-19-2015, 07:14 PM
These are all valid questions and while I understand your concerns, you will have to be patient while we work on specifics. All necessary details will be posted in following weeks.

Understandable and thank you for the reply. I look forward to any details or responses in regards to the questions or issues at hand. Cheers

BigQEd
04-19-2015, 08:15 PM
Awakening's legal team will review and let you know...

In all seriousness, we'll check it out. On the surface, it seems like a good deal and is essentially what Awakening (http://swgawakening.com) requested, a few months ago. We mentioned a "Partner Program" and an unlocked Engine and for that we appreciate that SWGEMU has listened!

Today, there is a New Hope... :)

Scurby
04-19-2015, 08:30 PM
Awakening's legal team will review and let you know...

In all seriousness, we'll check it out. On the surface, it seems like a good deal and is essentially what Awakening (http://swgawakening.com) requested, a few months ago. We mentioned a "Partner Program" and an unlocked Engine and for that we appreciate that SWGEMU has listened!

Today, there is a New Hope... :)

There's a lot to do yet... but I do believe you will be pleasantly surprised.

Thrax989
04-19-2015, 09:07 PM
Really looking forward to this Love seeing the Project Grow hour by hour. You guys are doing a dam good job keep up all the hard work. Never seen so many devoted individuals put so much time energy and effort into this project i really respect how far you guys are coming way to go SWGemu team.

symbolism
04-20-2015, 12:16 AM
Great move, congratulations to the SWGEmu team for finally being a lot more open with those "pesky" play servers. In spite of some recent comments from Vlada in other forums, this is definitely a much more inclusive way to run a community.

The only thought I have relates to protecting server based secrets to create a spectre of challenge and also a particular play style for the user base of play servers. Specifically, Awakening has decided that we do not want thousands of Jedi's running around and that we'd like to create quite a challenging scenario to unlock your Force Sensitivity. By becoming open source we would basically be giving away the secret to our player base of how they access the Jedi.

Now.. if we think about it, nothing within Glowing.lua would add to the community and ability to get us to 1.0 quicker than we're currently going. Other aspects of the Jedi system such as the Force Ranking System, Visibility, Powers and their Balance and even the Village system would definitely add to the community and should be open sourced, but glowing would basically contain the "business rules" to coin an enterprise term in how someone would then be able to access the Jedi system in game, this would mean that play servers could retain their "secret" without compromising moving this to a truly open source community where everyone opens their code base.

Thoughts?

Scurby
04-20-2015, 12:26 AM
Great move, congratulations to the SWGEmu team for finally being a lot more open with those "pesky" play servers. In spite of some recent comments from Vlada in other forums, this is definitely a much more inclusive way to run a community.

The only thought I have relates to protecting server based secrets to create a spectre of challenge and also a particular play style for the user base of play servers. Specifically, Awakening has decided that we do not want thousands of Jedi's running around and that we'd like to create quite a challenging scenario to unlock your Force Sensitivity. By becoming open source we would basically be giving away the secret to our player base of how they access the Jedi.

Now.. if we think about it, nothing within Glowing.lua would add to the community and ability to get us to 1.0 quicker than we're currently going. Other aspects of the Jedi system such as the Force Ranking System, Visibility, Powers and their Balance and even the Village system would definitely add to the community and should be open sourced, but glowing would basically contain the "business rules" to coin an enterprise term in how someone would then be able to access the Jedi system in game, this would mean that play servers could retain their "secret" without compromising moving this to a truly open source community where everyone opens their code base.

Thoughts?

Will be addressed...

duffstone
04-20-2015, 12:54 AM
Interesting... And little scary too... I'm afraid to ask, but will this shut down all of us non-contributors that like to use the VM dev environment to goof off and pretend that we can develop? I've been trying to learn C for years but just can't seem to take that step from modifying existing code (hacking) and writing clean fresh code that could be uploaded. but I still use this project as a good reason to keep trying to learn the language. It would seem anyone who downloads the source would "Have" to provide a mechanism for that source and any modifications to be downloaded. I know I don't have my own SVN, nor do I have anything other than the stock VM setup presently.

In the grand scheme this question means nothing because we all want v1.0 sooner rather than later... Still, it's been fun poking around and seeing how the whole thing works.

-Duff

Scurby
04-20-2015, 01:00 AM
Interesting... And little scary too... I'm afraid to ask, but will this shut down all of us non-contributors that like to use the VM dev environment to goof off and pretend that we can develop? I've been trying to learn C for years but just can't seem to take that step from modifying existing code (hacking) and writing clean fresh code that could be uploaded. but I still use this project as a good reason to keep trying to learn the language. It would seem anyone who downloads the source would "Have" to provide a mechanism for that source and any modifications to be downloaded. I know I don't have my own SVN, nor do I have anything other than the stock VM setup presently.

In the grand scheme this question means nothing because we all want v1.0 sooner rather than later... Still, it's been fun poking around and seeing how the whole thing works.

-Duff

Another question that will be addressed...

Sharp2255
04-20-2015, 02:58 AM
I wish a fraction of the people who run and code for private servers contributed to the core project until it got to 1.0. It would be better for everyone in the long run.

duffstone
04-20-2015, 03:48 AM
I wish a fraction of the people who run and code for private servers contributed to the core project until it got to 1.0. It would be better for everyone in the long run.

not everyone who can manage to get the VM working is capable of contributing anything worthwhile. I can make subtle changes to core3 to function differently, I can add new objects that aren't 14.1 canon, and when I'm motivated I can MOD like the wind... but a C programmer I am not. If non-developers get shut out of the core, I will miss it dearly. But I would also give it up readily to see the project get to v1.0 before this decade is up.

-Duff

Esquire1980
04-20-2015, 05:14 AM
As a new Core 3 based server owner, I see nothing except good out of this decision. Thank you TA and EMU staff. We haven't advertised as yet and probably will not for a few months yet. But, our forums and main server are up and running at this time and our core group is in playing and testing.

I, and a few others, even tho we are on our server still donate, report, and maintain toons over here, etc over here to still continue to do our part to get 1.0 happening a little faster and further the goal. It's on my forums for players to contribute with donations and testing over here as well. It's also on my forums that if Bas bans a player from forums or game, they will be banned on our server also. We set up our server with the mindset of working with SWGEMU and not against EMU. This is not a competition.

I see no problem with continuing the open source conditions for future code. Even tho we are implementing tre files that have CU/NGE item(s), and even some new ones (we have a graphics guy), the legal situation with ALL of these servers is free/non profit or LA (the mouse) can and probably will get involved with the offender and at that point, will most probably include ALL the other servers as well. It's nothing more than a name and address change to a header for a Cease and Desist to the offender and to everyone else that isn't offending. Owning a copyright to a single line of code, on a completed project that CAN NOT accept nor make profits, the original work is clearly stated open source, and has an IP that is still in question is like owning nothing. The end result on a financial statement is still 0. The ONLY addition I can see is bragging rights and that simply does not help the small, CD owning, SWG community at all, nor does it help get the main project out of alpha.

TA and SWGEMU staff, you have my and our team's full support. Thank you for your consideration and if there is anything you need from us, feel free to just ask. And thank you, again.

SWGCHOICE.com

jthepunisher
04-20-2015, 06:50 AM
Engine3 is being developed as part of this project and is being supported with donor money. However, the engine is not, and never has been, open source. I find it laughable that you expect others to open ALL their code (as you say here "...and make all their stuff available") when you have never fully opened yours. The 2.5 hour time limit has been gone on most of your major competitors' servers for quite some time, so you really aren't giving up anything.

Will the engine finally be open source? Will the engine be fully unlocked and open source upon the release of the 1.0 version of the SWGEmu? Do you intend to license the engine at a cost to SWG private severs or other MMOs or will it be provided at no cost? How can you demand every other project be ALL open source when you won't do the same? If you want "to ensure that everything is free and available to everyone" why not start with the engine that you are developing with the help of the community and their donations?

No matter what you do, most of the people who are developing on other servers have no interest in sharing their code here because they don't trust you to release a fully functioning, open source, SWG package free of charge and without restrictions to everyone that wants to run a server. All of you fanboys that think this is good for the community should demand that this project also play by these rules.

TheAnswer
04-20-2015, 07:03 AM
Engine3 is being developed as part of this project and is being supported with donor money. However, the engine is not, and never has been, open source. I find it laughable that you expect others to open ALL their code (as you say here "...and make all their stuff available") when you have never fully opened yours. The 2.5 hour time limit has been gone on most of your major competitors' servers for quite some time, so you really aren't giving up anything.

Will the engine finally be open source? Will the engine be fully unlocked and open source upon the release of the 1.0 version of the SWGEmu? Do you intend to license the engine at a cost to SWG private severs or other MMOs or will it be provided at no cost? How can you demand every other project be ALL open source when you won't do the same? If you want "to ensure that everything is free and available to everyone" why not start with the engine that you are developing with the help of the community and their donations?

No matter what you do, most of the people who are developing on other servers have no interest in sharing their code here because they don't trust you to release a fully functioning, open source, SWG package free of charge and without restrictions to everyone that wants to run a server. All of you fanboys that think this is good for the community should demand that this project also play by these rules.

The engine was not developed with donors money, nothing was developed with donors money, the money went into the running of the servers.

The engine in particular was started by Oru before emu even existed and has since been evolved and incorporated into other commercial software, he/SWGEmu hold full copyright of it. Nobody besides him and me wrote that code.



The 2.5 hour time limit has been gone on most of your major competitors' servers for quite some time, so you really aren't giving up anything.


Except we are not competitors, we always had a strict 14.1 rule and wont going to break it, implement whatever you want to your servers be it 14.1 or not.
We want people to be able to use our code without the need of buying "hacked" engine3 from third parties and then blaming our code on their problems.



..open ALL their code..


You are using ALL of our code that people have been developing for more than 10 years.

Whether you like it or not, to continue using updated Core3 code you will need to comply with AGPL, instead of trying to profit from it.

Qana
04-20-2015, 08:27 AM
Thumbs up, thank you for this decision!

Aso
04-20-2015, 01:09 PM
I'm very happy to see this change, but at the same time I'm cautiously optimistic. I have the same concerns as others have mentioned regarding custom Jedi systems.

Reckoning's custom lua scripts are 100% separate from Core3 and located in a separate directory. This was done to prevent merge conflicts with SWGEmu. Essentially, if the scripts are there, Core3 loads them, if not, Core3 goes about its business. These lua scripts are not modifications of Core3 source code nor are they required by Core 3 to run. So from reading the AGPL license, they look to be exempt. Grant it, I'm no lawyer. This is just the way the license reads, along with info I've found online regarding AGPL. I'm hoping for further clarification if this is not the case.

I have no problems integrating our NGE content into Core3 for others to use so it becomes part of the "source", but my main goal is to protect the mystery of our Jedi system.

TheAnswer
04-20-2015, 01:21 PM
I'm very happy to see this change, but at the same time I'm cautiously optimistic. I have the same concerns as others have mentioned regarding custom Jedi systems.

Reckoning's custom lua scripts are 100% separate from Core3 and located in a separate directory. This was done to prevent merge conflicts with SWGEmu. Essentially, if the scripts are there, Core3 loads them, if not, Core3 goes about its business. These lua scripts are not modifications of Core3 source code nor are they required by Core 3 to run. So from reading the AGPL license, they look to be exempt. Grant it, I'm no lawyer. This is just the way the license reads, along with info I've found online regarding AGPL. I'm hoping for further clarification if this is not the case.

I have no problems integrating our NGE content into Core3 for others to use so it becomes part of the "source", but my main goal is to protect the mystery of our Jedi system.

We are working on separating the scripts/data from the main core3 project for them to be under a different license that would allow servers to have their own custom "hidden" content.

Aso
04-20-2015, 01:50 PM
We are working on separating the scripts/data from the main core3 project for them to be under a different license that would allow servers to have their own custom "hidden" content.

Thanks for clarifying. I'm working on getting a public repository up and knowing some of the details ahead of time certainly helps.

travvy13
04-20-2015, 02:01 PM
I am all for sharing code, this will further push for a unified SWGEmu community who wants 14.1/1.0 and are not more concerned with their personal desires such as jedi unlock. Dont get me wrong i want jedi, jtl, and the whole nine yards but this community has fragmented off to too many smaller communities because some people dont want to help on objects that need to be implemented first, or because their main concerns might be the desire to wave a glow stick over fixing things like DE and such. Without this code that has been developed for us you wouldn't be able to wield that glow stick regardless so why not just help us by doing your part! [this doesnt apply to all]

All im saying is the sooner we put our heads together to achieve a greater objective, once it has been reached, if you wish to go about your business then do so... but in the end we still have the finished product... that seems like a better win win for all of us then 6 small communities developing what they see fit..


regardless /cheer /clap to our QA/DEV/Staff who are doing a great job on achieving this great milestone.

Sharp2255
04-20-2015, 02:24 PM
not everyone who can manage to get the VM working is capable of contributing anything worthwhile. I can make subtle changes to core3 to function differently, I can add new objects that aren't 14.1 canon, and when I'm motivated I can MOD like the wind... but a C programmer I am not. If non-developers get shut out of the core, I will miss it dearly. But I would also give it up readily to see the project get to v1.0 before this decade is up.

-Duff

Not really saying anyone but if you can manage to run Core 3 and add features and functionality to your server; why not contribute to the core project to make your server better in the long run.

Esquire
04-20-2015, 02:42 PM
I would take this to believe that if you use SWGEMU future development, such as adds to Test Center (JTL, village, etc), that would revert your license on past downloads as well. I would imagine that the "grandfather" exception to the new licensing would preclude any further downloads, if one wanted to keep their code additions "secret" and not comply with the AGPL change.

Thinking correctly? (And I still have no problems with this)

TheAnswer
04-20-2015, 02:46 PM
I would take this to believe that if you use SWGEMU future development, such as adds to Test Center (JTL, village, etc), that would revert your license on past downloads as well. I would imagine that the "grandfather" exception to the new licensing would preclude any further downloads, if one wanted to keep their code additions "secret" and not comply with the AGPL change.

Thinking correctly? (And I still have no problems with this)

Yes, any piece of code that is added after the license change is under AGPL and so if you copy it you need to comply with AGPL.

Wodaz Freecrest
04-20-2015, 03:01 PM
I think this is great for everyone involved with some aspect of this project. Seeing news like this shows great promise that the end goal is in sight and we all can finally get our game back. Thanks to everyone throughout the years that has made this all possible.

Livy2K
04-20-2015, 04:32 PM
Not really saying anyone but if you can manage to run Core 3 and add features and functionality to your server; why not contribute to the core project to make your server better in the long run.

Because some people are literally just messing around not intending for any added/changed to be used in an actual play server.

For instance - lets say your looking at bug xyz on mantis, you *think* you can solve it so you make modifications then boot up your instance to see - should that require being posted as open source when it really isnt adding anything other than spaghetti as you work towards making a proper submission to be reviewed.

dannienuc
04-20-2015, 05:21 PM
Because some people are literally just messing around not intending for any added/changed to be used in an actual play server.

For instance - lets say your looking at bug xyz on mantis, you *think* you can solve it so you make modifications then boot up your instance to see - should that require being posted as open source when it really isnt adding anything other than spaghetti as you work towards making a proper submission to be reviewed.

I'm pretty sure that if it's an individual working on a 'personal' copy of the code with no distribution, than you would be under no obligation to publish source code. GPL/ AGPL is intended to protect published open source work, not personal projects. If, using the given scenario, the individual in question decides that his bug fix is so great that he wants to push it out as his own public play server, at that point it would fall under the provisions of the license. Devs/ CS, if I'm wrong please let me know. Additionally, if this supposed individual was just a really great guy, he ought to get in touch with the devs, as he may be able to make a contribution to the project with what he/she has done.

Korsis
04-20-2015, 06:19 PM
I have wanted for some time to setup a small play server, but hated the time restriction and did not want a hacked version. So i love this idea.

That said, its been awhile since I have looked for server setup/install/engine3 information.

Where should I be looking for applying for this updated engine and or downloading it? Will links to that and the engine be posted in this thread? if not can someone PM me and point me in the right direction.

Vlada
04-20-2015, 06:21 PM
I have wanted for some time to setup a small play server, but hated the time restriction and did not want a hacked version. So i love this idea.

That said, its been awhile since I have looked for server setup/install/engine3 information.

Where should I be looking for applying for this updated engine and or downloading it? Will links to that and the engine be posted in this thread? if not can someone PM me and point me in the right direction.

All will be revealed soon™

TheAnswer
04-20-2015, 06:34 PM
I'm pretty sure that if it's an individual working on a 'personal' copy of the code with no distribution, than you would be under no obligation to publish source code. GPL/ AGPL is intended to protect published open source work, not personal projects. If, using the given scenario, the individual in question decides that his bug fix is so great that he wants to push it out as his own public play server, at that point it would fall under the provisions of the license. Devs/ CS, if I'm wrong please let me know. Additionally, if this supposed individual was just a really great guy, he ought to get in touch with the devs, as he may be able to make a contribution to the project with what he/she has done.

That's correct, the server cannot be public.

Kinshi
04-20-2015, 07:02 PM
http://www.swgemu.com/forums/content.php?r=530-Public-Engine3-without-time-restrictions

While it came too late for me as I have exited the SWG emulation scene, I can say I am proud that my server, Tarkin was already behaving under this model for quite some time by making itself Open Source and may have in a small way contributed to this decision by demonstrating that a community server can behave in a legit, responsible manner, and can aide in the mainstream testing and development if it chooses too. There is no good reason for some other community server and SWGEmu to be at odds with each other, it just takes recognizing each others limits and goals, and actively looking for the common ground, and generally not getting in each other's way.

Tarkin may be gone, but I am glad to see this kind of "detente" emerge, and that "Open Source" can maybe live up to its potential in a SWG sense.

I cannot wait to see the effect of AGPL on the overall community..there needs to be a lot of opening up in general.

anyway, kudos on this move.

JoeSwindell
04-20-2015, 10:23 PM
Great news!

oginecka
04-20-2015, 10:52 PM
Being someone who played SWG since the very first day, I have been watching the project for a couple years now. The time limitation on the engine has always put me off. When I was deciding what project to focus on last year, I opted for Minecraft server development over SWG for that reason.

I can't speak for others, but a part of me is still saddened that SWG closed down a few years ago. It made me realise how uncertain the future of any MMO is and that one day I might not be able to play the game I love. The idea of emulating SWG to me represents the fact that I will be able to launch up SWG 1, 5, 10 or 20 years from now and still be able to play it. It is that sense of security I was looking for and it is something I did not see in SWGEMU. The whole project was always covered by a veil of mystery. The last thing I would want is to invest myself into something SWG related once more, only to find out it disappears on me again due to the engine being closed license.

As someone who can't really code in C, I found the community around SWGEMU somewhat unwelcoming. I have noticed many responses to interested new members come across as "If you can't code, we don't need you". I understand that in part - I have little to contribute in terms of coding. At the same time, I suspect a large part of the original SWG community is just like me - happy go out of our way to keep the idea of SWG going, while not wanting to lose it all for a second time.

My Minecraft community has three developers, but 12 staff members overall. We try to include every interested person to the best of our ability. I have to say that if it wasn't for the interested people who didn't ever provide a single line of code, my project would have never been as polished as it is today.

In the depth of my heart I hope that this change in engine licensing represents not only a way to merge scattered development branches into one, but also a step towards a more welcoming project to those of us not on the dev team. I very much value the work everyone on SWGEMU has put into the project. It is amazing and commendable where everything is in terms of development progress. Even though this may be negative feedback in parts, I'm not writing this to complain, but to offer a slightly different view of SWGEMU, one that perhaps others (those less active on the forums) share with me.

Tiars
04-21-2015, 12:29 AM
I actually like this change, especially the aspect that will the exception of the "Private Jedi Unlock" being forced to be shared and in the public domain.

I have strongly advocated that people share their changes and that individual SWGEmu based servers could have a significant distinction between the servers by picking and choosing which features from other servers their community wants. Much of this is also because in moving past SWGEmu 1.0 I see duplication of effort as bad for the community. I see the lasting servers being ones that provide extensions to SWGEmu 1.0 and the servers that die out being those that are simply static or pull code from others without contributing.

I have been working with people that have a launched but not announced server. I see this as something that we would make retroactive for out current changes. We will be one of the first to have our lawyer review the agreement and apply. It also causes me, personally, to want to spend more time working on it and start actively working with this team.

Now some of the possibly lost documentation, that I see people pestering people over are things like:

How to I code the C++ to use .lua files for configuration. (Using this is the best way to for people to add code outside of the .lua scripts and make it configurable.)
How do I create new items.
How do I create new craftable schematics.

These seem to be the common unanswered questions that people would ask about.

Miztah
04-21-2015, 01:14 AM
We're going to be working on getting a development wiki up in the near future so that we can start building our documentation back up again. Topics like those will definitely be included.

jthepunisher
04-21-2015, 02:49 AM
The engine was not developed with donors money, nothing was developed with donors money, the money went into the running of the servers.

The engine in particular was started by Oru before emu even existed and has since been evolved and incorporated into other commercial software, he/SWGEmu hold full copyright of it. Nobody besides him and me wrote that code.

I do not believe that the engine has been independent of this project and the benefit of it's donations, legal advice, hardware, and testing, but there is no point in arguing that or anything else.

Since you won't make the engine open source will you go on record that you will release the engine free of charge and without limiting time, connections, or placing any other restriction on those that want to run an SWGEmu server?

stheno2
04-21-2015, 03:33 AM
This is great news. As i have been taking a break from my EQEmu development lately and messing around in this code and on the swgemu official test servers, it is a very welcome announcement.
I have nothing but positive outlook seeing this going towards a more open model like EQEmu has. They have always been far ahead of just about any emu imo because of it.

Correct me if I am wrong, but as long as the "custom servers" include the code in the server backend that looks to the custom files/folders like lua they are fine.
Much like the way it was previously mentioned. Where it looks for the custom code and moves on if not found. This way the custom lua can be completely hidden from any specific license.
This also allows anyone including the official servers to have private mission files and such.
That complies with most any open source license.

There will always be servers that try to push things. Servers that don't last, and servers that stick around.
If anyone is familiar with EQEmu, you know there is different server ranks. The stable contributing servers are ranked high and noticeably "different" in the server select.
This gives players and player devs an initial immediate view of servers that are worth while to test for bug consistency across builds/servers.

Glad to see this happen. Now I get to split my attention between 2 of my favorite Emus lol

ps. I do hope to see or help make a VS2013 port for Winblows. as I am far more familiar with that IDE than anything else.

Oru
04-21-2015, 07:12 AM
I do not believe that the engine has been independent of this project and the benefit of it's donations, legal advice, hardware, and testing, but there is no point in arguing that or anything else.

Engine3 benefited from SWGEmu just as much as from any other projects where it is being used. In exchange for it came free of charge to this open source project.


Since you won't make the engine open source will you go on record that you will release the engine free of charge and without limiting time, connections, or placing any other restriction on those that want to run an SWGEmu server?
Seems our communication is not the very best but this is clearly the intent. The public engine has been limited in order to concentrate testing to one place but since the cat is already out of the bag, there is no point in helding on to this scheme.

It is very common practice for applications to build on 3rd party platforms, frameworks, libraries and such so engine 3 remaining closed source should not affect anyone to any degree.

TheAnswer
04-21-2015, 07:12 AM
I do not believe that the engine has been independent of this project and the benefit of it's donations, legal advice, hardware, and testing, but there is no point in arguing that or anything else.

Since you won't make the engine open source will you go on record that you will release the engine free of charge and without limiting time, connections, or placing any other restriction on those that want to run an SWGEmu server?

Yes I have no problems with that, we have always stated that for 1.0 release the engine will be released fully unlocked.

Actually the plan is to lift AGPL in core3 when 1.0 is released, thats why we put the disclaimer, and let communities do whatever they want with the code, but till we get there we want cooperation from everyone.

Tiars
04-21-2015, 08:57 AM
We're going to be working on getting a development wiki up in the near future so that we can start building our documentation back up again. Topics like those will definitely be included.

I am both really glad to hear this and sad. I finally got my environment up and working last December and most of my time in the development environment has been trying to learn my way around the code. I know that I have royally s****** up the code in my VM several times and had to reset it while I have been learning it. So I am glad to hear this.

My experience though in trying to get things documented when there is no documentation is that this can be considerable work. Unfortunately those who are best prepared to quickly provide the documentation are also the most productive in writing code. Plus as a volunteer project I also understand that there may be some problem dragging people away from the fun stuff to provide documentation. But I also know that when it is up I will try to provide what little I have deciphered to help it along.

jthepunisher
04-21-2015, 03:23 PM
Engine3 benefited from SWGEmu just as much as from any other projects where it is being used. In exchange for it came free of charge to this open source project.


Seems our communication is not the very best but this is clearly the intent. The public engine has been limited in order to concentrate testing to one place but since the cat is already out of the bag, there is no point in helding on to this scheme.

It is very common practice for applications to build on 3rd party platforms, frameworks, libraries and such so engine 3 remaining closed source should not affect anyone to any degree.

Thank you both. I really appreciate you taking the time to respond to some tough questions. That shows a lot of class. As long as the goal is to give everyone open access to SWG I am happy.

Ki-Fu
04-21-2015, 06:02 PM
Kudos.....

longbow
04-22-2015, 02:46 AM
I love this project but I don't think this shift is going to accomplish anything. The servers that are popular have long since reverse engineered the project to remove the restart issues. You guys will not be able to limit who uses or access your source code and you certainly aren't going to sue anyone. I don't really understand whats going to be accomplished other than an additional fracture. All that being said, I hope for the best!

TheAnswer
04-22-2015, 05:49 AM
I love this project but I don't think this shift is going to accomplish anything. The servers that are popular have long since reverse engineered the project to remove the restart issues. You guys will not be able to limit who uses or access your source code and you certainly aren't going to sue anyone. I don't really understand whats going to be accomplished other than an additional fracture. All that being said, I hope for the best!

Using engine3 without our consent is grounds for litigation. There are 3rd parties involved with it, not related to swgemu, where money is not a problem.

The main intention behind this change is to allow everyone who shares their work to use it without any issues, thats the condition the emu had to deal with too.

We don't want people selling and/or using a 'hacked' version, we don't want people to profit from work on core3 of so many that worked here for almost a decade.

These servers say we are "competitors" when we never were or will be, the main focus here is to finish development, not the donations, not basilisk. Donations stop? Basilisk goes poof and we continue devolping without it. Thats where the donations go unlike on some of these other servers that have been selling credits and items for money.

And I personally can't wait to get to 1.0 and move on from this community. Once development is finished, AGPL will be lifted, engine limitations will be lifted(already are) and I will be long gone too.

Thrax989
04-22-2015, 06:19 AM
In all honesty "TheAnswer" you are doing a great job 10/10. You put in a lot of hard work and i notice it, keep up all the great success. As for the whole SWGemu team you guys provide the the best engine on the market, what more is there to say without you guys there is no real Base. I'm all for new beginnings hope this can speed up the process to version 1.0 .

DrDax
04-22-2015, 12:14 PM
In all honesty "TheAnswer" you are doing a great job 10/10. You put in a lot of hard work and i notice it, keep up all the great success. As for the whole SWGemu team you guys provide the the best engine on the market, what more is there to say without you guys there is no real Base. I'm all for new beginnings hope this can speed up the process to version 1.0 .

Here Here!

(I could say more.. but well said)

Esquire
04-22-2015, 02:11 PM
Using engine3 without our consent is grounds for litigation. There are 3rd parties involved with it, not related to swgemu, where money is not a problem.

The main intention behind this change is to allow everyone who shares their work to use it without any issues, thats the condition the emu had to deal with too.

We don't want people selling and/or using a 'hacked' version, we don't want people to profit from work on core3 of so many that worked here for almost a decade.

These servers say we are "competitors" when we never were or will be, the main focus here is to finish development, not the donations, not basilisk. Donations stop? Basilisk goes poof and we continue devolping without it. Thats where the donations go unlike on some of these other servers that have been selling credits and items for money.

And I personally can't wait to get to 1.0 and move on from this community. Once development is finished, AGPL will be lifted, engine limitations will be lifted(already are) and I will be long gone too.

There are other situations in which this "industry" can police itself also. Through the license, you can assign limited rights on a case by case basis either by power of atty or some other limited instrument. Take an offending server in the US that agrees to your license and then does not abide by it's requirement (Server A). Server B, also from the US, attempts to obtain, thru the license, code from Server A and gets turned down flat. Server B can go thru you and obtain limited authority and asks the courts for regress without any burden of litigation to the original holder (you). As added incentive, if Server B can prove to the courts (51%) that there is/was malice or an attempt to defraud, then punitive damages can and will come into play also. In the state where I live, punitive damages are limited by statute to 250,000.00 per offence. In the case where someone without a legal background is not in server administration, I know of plenty of attys who would take such a case (and incentive) on a contingency basis. (no cash up front and fee payment if and when a judgment is entered)

You could also stop an offending server from usage of your license/code/product. Upon receiving notice that a server has failed to comply with the licensing requirements, you send out a "Cease and Desist" that your counsel has drawn and you can simply change the header to whomever you chose. If they do not comply with that, then your counsel could initiate proceedings upon which you would receive any and all damages, including the retail pricing of the product.

All kinds of things could be done to gain the result that you want.

I'm sure, dealing with all this mess, for 10 years +, that your probably more than a little bit tired of it all but please don't let a few "bad apples" spoil the entire bushel for you.

IndigoKuush
04-22-2015, 04:53 PM
The more different servers the more the remaining population of players gets diluted. Cant imagine how people play on even less populated servers, this game is barely enjoyable without lots of people playing.

Livy2K
04-23-2015, 09:00 PM
The more different servers the more the remaining population of players gets diluted. Cant imagine how people play on even less populated servers, this game is barely enjoyable without lots of people playing.

You arent considering that the population is heavily segregated by playstyles no matter how many people are on basilisk.

For instance the PvP pool of ~20-30 players one can expect on basilisk doesnt require the other ~1480 for anything other than being an audience.

Communities like that can flourish and operate perfectly fine on private servers (although of all the community subsections of this game, the PvP crowd is the most likely to multi server anyway).




As far as the communication between swgemu and private servers, can we assume that it will no longer be taboo to discuss our experiences on other servers?

The mandatory forum thread locks/deletions and in some case bans for just talking about play experience on other swgemu based servers via videos or ss has been draconian to say the least.

Vlada
04-23-2015, 09:09 PM
As far as the communication between swgemu and private servers, can we assume that it will no longer be taboo to discuss our experiences on other servers?

The mandatory forum thread locks/deletions and in some case bans for just talking about play experience on other swgemu based servers via videos or ss has been draconian to say the least.

There will be a section designed for that very purpose. But yeah, anything outside that section will be either moved or locked. Even though that section will be dedicated to various SWGEmu based communities rest of the forums should remain focused on SWGEmu alone.

Halyn
04-23-2015, 09:52 PM
Not to be pushy, but when can we expect to see more details on this?

Vlada
04-23-2015, 10:05 PM
Not to be pushy, but when can we expect to see more details on this?

When we get all the kinks worked out. Please be patient a while longer, it is very important that we do this right from the get go.

Halyn
04-23-2015, 10:54 PM
Fair enough, and thank you.

duffstone
04-23-2015, 11:43 PM
You arent considering that the population is heavily segregated by playstyles no matter how many people are on basilisk.

For instance the PvP pool of ~20-30 players one can expect on basilisk doesnt require the other ~1480 for anything other than being an audience.

Communities like that can flourish and operate perfectly fine on private servers (although of all the community subsections of this game, the PvP crowd is the most likely to multi server anyway).


Agree, and to add to it: Server populations will never be like they were in SOE's version, even at it's lowest point. Anyone following the project, who might expect to re-live the glory days of mass PVP and huge server populations, will be disappointed. Even if you could consolidate the whole of all EMU communities into 1 play server, you'd still not equal the activity seen in SOE's version, even on the dead servers that were consolidated.

biggest reason is that we're all 10+ years older and the magic is slowly receding. Not to say that we can't have healthy, numerous communities. We can. They'll just number in the 10's, with populations in the 1000's, with maybe 100's online at any given time. Although I hope I'm wrong, i'm guessing that's a BEST case scenario.

-Duff

Vlada
04-24-2015, 12:04 AM
Agree, and to add to it: Server populations will never be like they were in SOE's version, even at it's lowest point. Anyone following the project, who might expect to re-live the glory days of mass PVP and huge server populations, will be disappointed. Even if you could consolidate the whole of all EMU communities into 1 play server, you'd still not equal the activity seen in SOE's version, even on the dead servers that were consolidated.

biggest reason is that we're all 10+ years older and the magic is slowly receding. Not to say that we can't have healthy, numerous communities. We can. They'll just number in the 10's, with populations in the 1000's, with maybe 100's online at any given time. Although I hope I'm wrong, i'm guessing that's a BEST case scenario.

-Duff

Ummm... No. We already have SOE servers beat even at their glory days. SOE had a server cap of 3k instances online and we went over that during one of Bas stress tests.

Second, that illusion that SOE servers were always capped during Pre-CU and that even after the numbers started to dwindle their numbers could be considered as decent needs to stop. Here: http://www.ign.com/boards/threads/swg-server-loads-revealed-deleted-off-the-oe-boards.109251731/


here is the list of the servers, and the population of players currently logged in...

ID: 24 - Name: Europe-Infinity - IP: 195.33.138.101 - PortA: 44463 - PortB: 44462 - Population: 0334
ID: 23 - Name: Europe-FarStar - IP: 195.33.138.75 - PortA: 44463 - PortB: 44462 - Population: 0133
ID: 22 - Name: Europe-Chimaera - IP: 195.33.138.41 - PortA: 44463 - PortB: 44462 - Population: 0331
ID: 1C - Name: Shadowfire - IP: 199.108.197.130 - PortA: 44463 - PortB: 44462 - Population: 0518
ID: 1B - Name: Wanderhome - IP: 199.108.197.103 - PortA: 44463 - PortB: 44462 - Population: 0462
ID: 1A - Name: Tarquinas - IP: 199.108.197.87 - PortA: 44463 - PortB: 44462 - Population: 0456
ID: 19 - Name: Starsider - IP: 199.108.197.50 - PortA: 44463 - PortB: 44462 - Population: 0414
ID: 13 - Name: Tempest - IP: 199.108.7.148 - PortA: 44463 - PortB: 44462 - Population: 0457
ID: 12 - Name: Valcyn - IP: 199.108.7.111 - PortA: 44463 - PortB: 44462 - Population: 0455
ID: 11 - Name: Sunrunner - IP: 199.108.7.73 - PortA: 44463 - PortB: 44462 - Population: 0493
ID: 10 - Name: Scylla - IP: 199.108.7.50 - PortA: 44463 - PortB: 44462 - Population: 0457
ID: 0F - Name: Naritus - IP: 199.108.8.137 - PortA: 44463 - PortB: 44462 - Population: 0496
ID: 0E - Name: Kettemoor - IP: 199.108.8.117 - PortA: 44463 - PortB: 44462 - Population: 0522
ID: 0D - Name: Intrepid - IP: 199.108.6.178 - PortA: 44463 - PortB: 44462 - Population: 0456
ID: 0C - Name: Flurry - IP: 199.108.6.133 - PortA: 44463 - PortB: 44462 - Population: 0473
ID: 0B - Name: Radiant - IP: 199.108.198.70 - PortA: 44463 - PortB: 44462 - Population: 0266
ID: 0A - Name: Lowca - IP: 199.108.198.36 - PortA: 44463 - PortB: 44462 - Population: 0227
ID: 09 - Name: Kauri - IP: 199.108.196.178 - PortA: 44463 - PortB: 44462 - Population: 0245
ID: 08 - Name: Gorath - IP: 199.108.196.131 - PortA: 44463 - PortB: 44462 - Population: 0271
ID: 07 - Name: Eclipse - IP: 199.108.196.101 - PortA: 44463 - PortB: 44462 - Population: 0397
ID: 06 - Name: Chilastra - IP: 199.108.196.84 - PortA: 44463 - PortB: 44462 - Population: 0357
ID: 05 - Name: Bloodfin - IP: 199.108.196.40 - PortA: 44463 - PortB: 44462 - Population: 0441
ID: 04 - Name: Corbantis - IP: 199.108.6.105 - PortA: 44463 - PortB: 44462 - Population: 0460
ID: 03 - Name: Ahazi - IP: 199.108.6.79 - PortA: 44463 - PortB: 44462 - Population: 0520
ID: 02 - Name: Bria - IP: 199.108.6.53 - PortA: 44463 - PortB: 44462 - Population: 0722

of course i should'nt have this info but i have friends who like to hack.
believe it or not this is the real info.â€

END QUOTE
LINK: http://forums.station.sony.com/swg/board/message?board.id=swggpdiscussion&message.id=433038

More info....

-These server numbers were taken sometime on Friday evening. I do not know how they were obtained other than the OP (name was: neowarderdude) saying that they were “hacked†by his friends.

-These numbers do not show how many total subs are on each server, rather, it’s a “snapshot in time†of how many people are on each server at the time the numbers were obtained (primetime Friday).

-Whether or not these numbers are legit no one can say definitively one way or the other... Apparently, if you do a Yahoo search for those IP’s, they do show up as actual SWG IP for those servers.

http://www.xfire.com/xf/modules.php?name=XFire&file=profile&uname=g33p33

-As to how SOE has the server pop's adjusted, he said:
"neowarderdude wrote:
Full = 3000
Extreamly Heavy = 1500
Very Heavy = 1200
Heavy = 900
Medium = 600
Light = 300
Very Light = 0

my friend gave me that list, and that's how it calculated before NGE (but he thinks they've changed it a bit since NGE)"

- This may be of some significance:
"neowarderdude wrote:
Did you substitute the word population for the actual connections to each given port and does it include all the sub for the ip's

The numbers that are given to the client when it connects to the logon server, it uses those numbers to determine how full the server is. My friend use to see numbers in the 1500-2000 range with bria hitting 3000"

-Quick Stats: 10,363 people total
Most people on a server: Bria
Bria’s Population: 722 (conceptually speaking approx 60 people per planet)

Least amount of people: Lowca
Lowca’s population: 227 (conceptually speaking approx 18 people per planet)
Note, I ignored Europe-FareStar server’s pop (of 113) b/c it’s not in its prime time there.


-Also, interestinly enough these numbers echo the Cube Stats from that much debated friday feature:
http://starwarsgalaxies.station.sony.com/en_US/players/content.vm?page=Lost%20Treasure&resource=features

Granted its 2006, so its from NGE but keep in mind that game continued to exist with numbers much lower than that for 5 more years.

Livy2K
04-24-2015, 12:39 AM
Naritus twice as strong as lowca from that quote.

Thanks for verifying Vlada

Tiars
04-24-2015, 12:42 AM
When we get all the kinks worked out. Please be patient a while longer, it is very important that we do this right from the get go.

Correct. I can understand the compromise to allow Jedi unlock code to remain secret. But I do not want to see the remainder of what is in .lua scripts and .tre file component additions and changes to end up secret because of a poorly worded attempt to exclude the Jedi unlock code.

So while I await the change I also want you to take the time to get it right.

bigevil
04-24-2015, 12:52 AM
Always very interesting regarding the misconceptions of population "back in the day."

The nostalgia regarding early memories of SWG lends to greater population "memories" as with many other things. How we remember it is always full of the blinding glare of new experience. :)

I consistently run with as much or more people around now then back in those days just a year after launch. Also, people are much busier now with so much more accrued knowledge about the game. Not as many standing around in player cities just looking at their stuff or someone elses. :) More spread out i think.

nee2earth
04-24-2015, 01:04 AM
we're all 10+ years older and the magic is slowly receding.



Speak for yourself.

ExplosiveCheese
04-24-2015, 01:33 AM
Using engine3 without our consent is grounds for litigation. There are 3rd parties involved with it, not related to swgemu, where money is not a problem.

The main intention behind this change is to allow everyone who shares their work to use it without any issues, thats the condition the emu had to deal with too.

We don't want people selling and/or using a 'hacked' version, we don't want people to profit from work on core3 of so many that worked here for almost a decade.

These servers say we are "competitors" when we never were or will be, the main focus here is to finish development, not the donations, not basilisk. Donations stop? Basilisk goes poof and we continue devolping without it. Thats where the donations go unlike on some of these other servers that have been selling credits and items for money.

And I personally can't wait to get to 1.0 and move on from this community. Once development is finished, AGPL will be lifted, engine limitations will be lifted(already are) and I will be long gone too.

You really do live up to your name :D

duffstone
04-24-2015, 02:55 AM
Vlada: A stress test and 2-3 major online communities fall remarkably shy of the 10.3K users shown in that NGE data. Either way it's comparing apples and oranges. and at the risk of sounding conciliatory, I really hope your oranges turn out to be the norm...

-Duff

Timbab
04-24-2015, 04:47 AM
What does it matter though if you had 10.3k servers across all servers? At the end of the day, SOE servers were still capped at 3k and as long as servers running Core3 can match that during prime timeframes population wise, you don't really have a problem.

Regardless of what ifs and maybes, people will come to at least check it out after 1.0, people that have been following the scene for years but aren't playing or paying too much attention currently. The old forum had what, 140k members? This one has 220k+ and it's not even 1.0 yet. You just need a fraction of that to be actively playing to fill up servers. PreCU peaked at 300k subs, last that I can remember and I can assure you, not all of those 300k subs were 24/7 players, you had a bunch of double accounts, etc.

Core3 stability and the size of the playerbase shouldn't even be a concern anymore for legit 1.0 and onward.

Vlada
04-24-2015, 06:20 AM
Vlada: A stress test and 2-3 major online communities fall remarkably shy of the 10.3K users shown in that NGE data. Either way it's comparing apples and oranges. and at the risk of sounding conciliatory, I really hope your oranges turn out to be the norm...

-Duff

SWGEmu members: 225,700 registered, active members:4,685. I am sure that other communities each have at least 50 active members, some have close if not over 1k active members. Add that up and numbers are is pretty close to those 10k you speak of. Just look at those Raph's articles, they have been posted, reposted, rereposted on each an every SWG and SWG emulation related forum, website and social media in a matter of days. There is still huge interest in SWG and everything SWG related.

ADL
04-24-2015, 10:29 PM
you mentioned server population being greater now then back in the days of live but back then we didn't have 10 toons per account , is the server status window counting accounts logged in our toons logged in ?

excellent move btw and yes the spark for SWG is not about to die cause its the closest you can be from living the movies , and 3 more to come so no worries :)

Vlada
04-24-2015, 11:14 PM
you mentioned server population being greater now then back in the days of live but back then we didn't have 10 toons per account , is the server status window counting accounts logged in our toons logged in ?

excellent move btw and yes the spark for SWG is not about to die cause its the closest you can be from living the movies , and 3 more to come so no worries :)


You can only have 2 online at the same time here, on SOE servers i remember folks having +5 accounts and toons online. So there isnt much difference there.

bigevil
04-25-2015, 01:00 AM
You can only have 2 online at the same time here, on SOE servers i remember folks having +5 accounts and toons online. So there isnt much difference there.

Yep. Funny memories. My buddy having extra phone lines instaled. Multiple machines. Having issues controlling multiple people at once. Dial up was fun in rural areas back then. :)

Heck i had issues with one account. LOL.

Onilwyn
04-25-2015, 02:32 AM
Yep. Funny memories. My buddy having extra phone lines instaled. Multiple machines. Having issues controlling multiple people at once. Dial up was fun in rural areas back then. :)

Heck i had issues with one account. LOL.

Hehe I had 3 accounts back in the day and my ex husband had 5. I now cringe at the money we used to shell out to SOE. I love this project and support what you guys do 100%.

Ellyssia
04-25-2015, 02:33 AM
8 between me, my ex, and two kids... at least 4 of them station access...

bigevil
04-25-2015, 02:40 AM
LOL. You all crack me up. Where the heck did you get time to manage that many accounts?!?!?!?

Onilwyn
04-25-2015, 02:41 AM
I had my combat toon but had no desire to be a jedi back then. So I wanted my own tailor...later I wanted my own entertainer. Going into the NGE when they allowed 2 characters, I let the 3rd acct lapse and only played 2. Then 1 at the end.

Esquire
04-25-2015, 05:37 AM
9 accounts here.

I had 4, wife had 5 (she started in the NGE and couldn't get my extra jedi unlocks) We actually had a T-1 installed in the house so we could play them all.

ADL
04-25-2015, 07:56 AM
You can only have 2 online at the same time here, on SOE servers i remember folks having +5 accounts and toons online. So there isnt much difference there.

your wisdom enlights me :)

acidanarchy
04-26-2015, 05:05 AM
Correct. I can understand the compromise to allow Jedi unlock code to remain secret. But I do not want to see the remainder of what is in .lua scripts and .tre file component additions and changes to end up secret because of a poorly worded attempt to exclude the Jedi unlock code.

So while I await the change I also want you to take the time to get it right.


I think we may be losing track of what the purpose of this change is. Based on your response here it sounds more like your mindset may be "how can I get access to some other server's stuff and copy or modify it for my own server" rather than "how can I learn how to develop something for my own server". There's countless areas and fragments of information all over the internet and these very forums that basically tell you how to do anything you want to do in the code. If you're worried about what another server is doing in their LUA and TRE files then I'm not sure you're looking at this for the right reasons. In fact, I'm still unclear on what the point of this is until details are released, because as I mentioned previously: what if a server has content that was created by a 3rd party which was contracted and paid to do the work exclusively for that server? Is that server now going to be obligated to release that paid development content to people who did not pay to have it developed or have access to it? If I managed to get Lockheed Martin to develop something for me, on paid development time, do I now need to share the source code even if it's completely unrelated to vanilla Core3 or the general roadmap?

Yes, servers will not want to have their Jedi unlock code made public for obvious reasons, and there's also obvious reasons that certain other content should not be made public as well. I can understand the reason to have source code made public if a specific server, for example, managed to fully develop and finish JTL for SWGEmu, then sure everyone else would want that. I fail to see how a server's unique content (whether it be LUA, C++, models, plugins, etc.) should in anyway be forced into open source for everyone if it's unrelated to the Core3 roadmap.

To be blunt, if I paid a company or person $50,000 to develop a giant pink dinosaur with a laser beam on it's forehead that zapped players into little bunny rabbits, all exclusively for my server then there's little to no chance that I'd be willing to share it with anyone unless they paid for it. On the other hand, if I happen to find unfinished Core3 content or bugs and I fix or finish them for the greater good of the entire community then of course I'd share that.

I'm not saying this applies to me or any specific server but rather as a general feeler to see if this type of stuff is being taken into consideration when forcing the release of a lot of content which is either irrelevant to SWGEmu's roadmap or funded intellectual property. Food for thought in any case. I'd hope the final details include provisions which support the Core3 project but also protect individual developer's work. The last thing I'd want to see is this become a deterrent to community developers where some people start to lose the interest and desire to do something for their server because it will just become open source. If the focus is community and SWGEmu (free to use for anyone) then I don't think we'd want to whittle down the communities which will ultimately become the backbone after 1.0



And I personally can't wait to get to 1.0 and move on from this community. Once development is finished, AGPL will be lifted, engine limitations will be lifted(already are) and I will be long gone too.

Case in point and I don't mean that in any negative or derogatory manner. I understand the need for "some things" to go open source but otherwise, and until details are released for this, I see it more as a possible deterrent to community development, where some developers may stop working on interesting and innovating things for the SWGEmu community because they don't want their source code or whatever to be released.


Cheers

burf2000
04-26-2015, 10:44 AM
I think this is good news, I have been working on my own private server purely to learn how it all works (my way of learning Linux lol). If people can feed back in some of there stuff (who said Jedi?) people could then get the core code from here and have options they wanted that where approved.

Not sure what hoops you have to jump through to sign up to it though.

Esquire
04-26-2015, 03:05 PM
I think we may be losing track of what the purpose of this change is. Based on your response here it sounds more like your mindset may be "how can I get access to some other server's stuff and copy or modify it for my own server" rather than "how can I learn how to develop something for my own server". There's countless areas and fragments of information all over the internet and these very forums that basically tell you how to do anything you want to do in the code. If you're worried about what another server is doing in their LUA and TRE files then I'm not sure you're looking at this for the right reasons. In fact, I'm still unclear on what the point of this is until details are released, because as I mentioned previously: what if a server has content that was created by a 3rd party which was contracted and paid to do the work exclusively for that server? Is that server now going to be obligated to release that paid development content to people who did not pay to have it developed or have access to it? If I managed to get Lockheed Martin to develop something for me, on paid development time, do I now need to share the source code even if it's completely unrelated to vanilla Core3 or the general roadmap?

Yes, servers will not want to have their Jedi unlock code made public for obvious reasons, and there's also obvious reasons that certain other content should not be made public as well. I can understand the reason to have source code made public if a specific server, for example, managed to fully develop and finish JTL for SWGEmu, then sure everyone else would want that. I fail to see how a server's unique content (whether it be LUA, C++, models, plugins, etc.) should in anyway be forced into open source for everyone if it's unrelated to the Core3 roadmap.

To be blunt, if I paid a company or person $50,000 to develop a giant pink dinosaur with a laser beam on it's forehead that zapped players into little bunny rabbits, all exclusively for my server then there's little to no chance that I'd be willing to share it with anyone unless they paid for it. On the other hand, if I happen to find unfinished Core3 content or bugs and I fix or finish them for the greater good of the entire community then of course I'd share that.

I'm not saying this applies to me or any specific server but rather as a general feeler to see if this type of stuff is being taken into consideration when forcing the release of a lot of content which is either irrelevant to SWGEmu's roadmap or funded intellectual property. Food for thought in any case. I'd hope the final details include provisions which support the Core3 project but also protect individual developer's work. The last thing I'd want to see is this become a deterrent to community developers where some people start to lose the interest and desire to do something for their server because it will just become open source. If the focus is community and SWGEmu (free to use for anyone) then I don't think we'd want to whittle down the communities which will ultimately become the backbone after 1.0



Case in point and I don't mean that in any negative or derogatory manner. I understand the need for "some things" to go open source but otherwise, and until details are released for this, I see it more as a possible deterrent to community development, where some developers may stop working on interesting and innovating things for the SWGEmu community because they don't want their source code or whatever to be released.


Cheers

I'm not sure it's Tiars that is "losing track" here.

Any play server (Bas has been said it is nothing more than a large test server) is benefiting from a open source project now. If it wasn't for that open source, there would be no other servers. There are already legal questions regarding adding to an open source project and then charging for those additions but the AGPL licensing puts an end to most all of these questions that come into play. Question that could even get the attention of a main IP holder that decides it's a little too much and makes the decision to end all of these servers. TA has to abide with his original agreement with SOE and/or LA and if he doesn't, there's another reason for all these servers to go up in smoke. We don't know the particulars of that agreement but I would imagine that "no profit" or even content that is claimed by ownership and therefore subject to sale, figured prominently. That could include up to, the "selling" of added code, lua files, etc that has been reported, at least to The Answer et al (who holds both the original agreement to allow even the conception of such a project and all rights to SWGEMU development). I can see that trying to claim copyright/ownership/right to sell/profit on any added code as being against that agreement AND against what TA et al is trying to accomplish here and is contractually bound by. And TA/EMU has the only counsel that is retained and knowledgeable of all of these matters.

The case you provide of "Lockhead" has nothing to do with a game emulator that the original work is clearly copyrighted/patented by the original maker. And those already issued copyrights/patents/ownership apply to most ALL of the coding additions that other servers are already using. Just because you add the NGE tre files or the pre-patch 9 boxes to your server doesn't mean that SOE/LA does not hold copyrights/patents/ownership to them already so any such addition can not be claimed as owned due to the fact they already are. People seem to forget that Disney now "owns" all of the content commonly called Star Wars as well. And in the case of someone paying for development for say....., JTL (and I've heard of another server(s) doing this), this is clearly part of the "roadmap" that SWGEMU is using and they could use that information as well and is already clearly owned by others. And if you only share it with SWGEMU, it will become open source anyway just as soon as it is released upon their test server. If community developers are "deterred" by having their work as open source then they're clearly working on the wrong project now. Besides that, I do not see any deterrent with ANY of the developers at SWGEMU. Perhaps we should ask them if open source is keeping them from all the work they are completing here.

The main objective, as I read what SWGEMU has said here, is a total NON-PROFIT situation ("free for all....") and if another so-called "server owner" is attempting to claim profit/ownership from something related to Star Wars Galaxies then they already have a lot more problems other than SWGEMU and/or TA. All "server-owners" should remember this even after the open source SWGEMU project is completed and the AGPL licensing that is coming now into effect, is lifted. And I would imagine that if "profits" get out of hand after 1.0 and Sony or LA does act, all you'll get from this original team is a large "I told you so".

Khieran
04-26-2015, 04:04 PM
Hes talking about new, original content that was never a part of any version of swg. If we make our own models, animations, systems etc. I certainly wouldnt want to be forced to give them to everyone when the entire point of all of those hours of work was to make my server different from the rest and draw our own crowd that enjoys my work. If i make a new vehicle.that loka like a cardboard box, and it teleports you to a planet called limbo, why should i be forced to give that away? It was never part of swg and soe/daybreak/la/disney never owned the tre files ive created nor the assets in them. Again, why should original content be forced to go open source?

Also, hes not talking about making money off of the emu, hes talkinh about paying coders and modellers etc for their time. Spending money does not = profit.

Lolindir
04-26-2015, 04:11 PM
Yes I have no problems with that, we have always stated that for 1.0 release the engine will be released fully unlocked.

Actually the plan is to lift AGPL in core3 when 1.0 is released, thats why we put the disclaimer, and let communities do whatever they want with the code, but till we get there we want cooperation from everyone.Post #57 (http://www.swgemu.com/forums/showthread.php?t=159544&page=4&p=1192429&viewfull=1#post1192429) in this thread.
If AGPL is lifted when we hit 1.0, then you can have your secret code. Until then, we are a development project and our code isn't finished.


Also, hes not talking about making money off of the emu, hes talkinh about paying coders and modellers etc for their time. Spending money does not = profit.I'm no lawyer, but its shady, since some one will make money from SWGEmu. The player/admin doing it, might not make money, but some one who can be considered a dev will.

Esquire
04-26-2015, 04:54 PM
Hes talking about new, original content that was never a part of any version of swg. If we make our own models, animations, systems etc. I certainly wouldnt want to be forced to give them to everyone when the entire point of all of those hours of work was to make my server different from the rest and draw our own crowd that enjoys my work. If i make a new vehicle.that loka like a cardboard box, and it teleports you to a planet called limbo, why should i be forced to give that away? It was never part of swg and soe/daybreak/la/disney never owned the tre files ive created nor the assets in them. Again, why should original content be forced to go open source?

Also, hes not talking about making money off of the emu, hes talkinh about paying coders and modellers etc for their time. Spending money does not = profit.

If you want ownership of a box vehicle then the easy answer is to make your own game. The problem here is your trying to install owned material into a already owned total game (the completed work) using code that is clearly open source to base your valued coding upon. Your trying to create value where you may be precluded via statute, US or otherwise, and/or an agreement for the original conception that may also preclude you from doing so. Your box vehicle is not stand alone, it requires code to operate made by SWGEMU which is open source along with being 1 system of many that makes up Star Wars Galaxies, a MMORPG game (total coding work) owned by others with intellectual property rights owned via yet another entity, a rather large one that holds the key to all of these emulator servers.

The one single problem for Disney is actual damages with a non-profit, altho Cease and Desist does not require actual damages to prosecute and there are still ways of stopping all these EMUs without actual damages. If anyone makes the 1st dollar off of SWG now, that damage problem is now ended and opens up all the other damages in which they can ask the courts for regress on. (consequential, punitive, etc etc etc.)

If this is what your trying to do, then my best suggestion is to speak to qualified counsel, and rather quickly.

Valkyra
04-26-2015, 06:22 PM
I'm no lawyer, but its shady, since some one will make money from SWGEmu. The player/admin doing it, might not make money, but some one who can be considered a dev will.

What if someone 'hired' a 'dev' to code in additional features/content for a new private server, and paid them for their time and resources for writing the code? I haven't really followed this thread closely, but it seems like this is the case for a few other communities.

I'm curious though, how exactly is that in any sort of violation against SWGEmu, legally, or non legally?

Vlada
04-26-2015, 06:39 PM
What if someone 'hired' a 'dev' to code in additional features/content for a new private server, and paid them for their time and resources for writing the code? I haven't really followed this thread closely, but it seems like this is the case for a few other communities.

I'm curious though, how exactly is that in any sort of violation against SWGEmu, legally, or non legally?

Why would SWGEmu care if others hire someone, its not our problem. Their money, they represent a separate legal entity from SWGEmu and they will be held accountable if they do something that illegal, not SWGEmu. Now, I am no expert but as i understand it, if that dev made any changes to the Core3 then because of AGPL those would have to be made available to the public. But, like TheAnswer said, scripts/data should be separate and under different license, so if that "hired dev" made changes to those, they wouldn't need to be released to the public.

acidanarchy
04-26-2015, 07:32 PM
Any play server (Bas has been said it is nothing more than a large test server) is benefiting from a open source project now. If it wasn't for that open source, there would be no other servers.


No one is questioning the SWGEmu project but rather the approach of "Show me yours and I'll show you mine". Sure, there are servers out there who are reaping the benefits of the SWGEmu project and not giving credit where credit is due, but there's also servers out there who are doing things the right way and their developers may want to keep some of their content non-public for very obvious reasons.


Hes talking about new, original content that was never a part of any version of swg. If we make our own models, animations, systems etc. I certainly wouldnt want to be forced to give them to everyone when the entire point of all of those hours of work was to make my server different from the rest and draw our own crowd that enjoys my work. If i make a new vehicle.that loka like a cardboard box, and it teleports you to a planet called limbo, why should i be forced to give that away? It was never part of swg and soe/daybreak/la/disney never owned the tre files ive created nor the assets in them. Again, why should original content be forced to go open source?

Also, hes not talking about making money off of the emu, hes talkinh about paying coders and modellers etc for their time. Spending money does not = profit.

Correct



I'm no lawyer, but its shady, since some one will make money from SWGEmu. The player/admin doing it, might not make money, but some one who can be considered a dev will.

No one mentioned making money from anything. The concern is being forced into releasing "source" for content which was created independently of the project.


Your box vehicle is not stand alone, it requires code to operate made by SWGEMU which is open source along with being 1 system of many that makes up Star Wars Galaxies

But it would be stand-alone because his box vehicle was developed outside of SWGEmu and outside of SWG, which his content can be tailored to be used on any platform realistically (regardless if his content is a model or compiled code). If SOE or SWGEmu released a set of "tools" which were the sole means in which it was possible to create "content", and someone created "content" on said "tools" for SWG or SWGEmu then I'd agree. If SWGEmu released a 3D modeling program to create 3D models for SWG, then sure. If he decides to release a compiled version of his box vehicle, created in Maya for example, accompanied by scripts created in Visual C++, and grant others the rights to use, but not sell or modify, the box vehicle for "something" it doesn't change the fact that he's the original creator and holds rights to the IP.

Again, I understand the basis for the idea behind this as there are certain servers making wild claims to be doing things we all know they are not. The question becomes is there any consideration to individual developers and servers who wish to protect their content. Where is the line drawn and at what point does it become so irrelevant that it does more harm than good?

In the end we're sitting here debating about who's content should be protected against being made public, and meanwhile most of us all know how SWGEmu came to be. Sony didn't exactly make a public release of their content. I'm not saying this in a good or bad way, but rather that it's very ironic we're even having a debate over this.

There's most certainly developers who fully support the SWGEmu project and it would be a shame to see some of those developers decide to close shop over this decision. As I mentioned in my earlier response, if the focus is community and keeping SWG alive then why would there be a push that alienates certain people in the community who will ultimately become the backbone of the community after 1.0. I don't personally feel the direction of "Show me yours and I'll show you mine" is the best possible solution to the matter.


What if someone 'hired' a 'dev' to code in additional features/content for a new private server, and paid them for their time and resources for writing the code? I haven't really followed this thread closely, but it seems like this is the case for a few other communities.

I'm curious though, how exactly is that in any sort of violation against SWGEmu, legally, or non legally?

Correct


Now, I am no expert but as i understand it, if that dev made any changes to the Core3 then because of AGPL those would have to be made available to the public. But, like TheAnswer said, scripts/data should be separate and under different license, so if that "hired dev" made changes to those, they wouldn't need to be released to the public.

I'm definitely no legal expect as well. I'd hope that the intent and interpretation of the licensing is to govern and mandate that "changes" to existing vanilla content be within the provisions of public access, however the additions of new content (models, source code, etc.) could remain outside the provisions of public access and be protected under a separate provision which governs the addition of custom content. My concern is that the definition of "custom content" is only going to be limited to certain things and leave a huge gap of others exposed (such as C++ source code).

Vlada
04-26-2015, 07:49 PM
I'm definitely no legal expect as well. I'd hope that the intent and interpretation of the licensing is to govern and mandate that "changes" to existing vanilla content be within the provisions of public access, however the additions of new content (models, source code, etc.) could remain outside the provisions of public access and be protected under a separate provision which governs the addition of custom content. My concern is that the definition of "custom content" is only going to be limited to certain things and leave a huge gap of others exposed (such as C++ source code).

It probably is going to cause just that, but if folks are so determined to protect their stuff then maybe they should focus only on scripts and postpone any serious Core3 changes until 1.0 and change of licensing it will bring.

acidanarchy
04-26-2015, 08:10 PM
It probably is going to cause just that, but if folks are so determined to protect their stuff then maybe they should focus only on scripts and postpone any serious Core3 changes until 1.0 and change of licensing it will bring.

That would be unfortunate but I'll wait for you folks to release further details. Personally, I feel a lot of this could be accomplished by working directly with those who run the servers (or do development) vs trying to accomplish it through licensing changes for everyone on a temporary basis. I'm sure many servers (or developers) out there would be more than happy to work with the SWGEmu staff on an individual case by case basis with requests for information when needed. Those problem servers who are attempting to "compete" would, in my opinion, be easy to isolate without effecting the rest of the community who support and wish to see the SWGEmu project succeed.

Thanks for the responses you guys (and ladies) have all given thus far, it's much appreciated.

Cheers

Tiars
04-26-2015, 08:32 PM
I think we may be losing track of what the purpose of this change is.

I do not think that I am losing track. My understanding is that the intention is to make it easier to complete Version 1.0 and get it out the door.

Since the scripts and any changes to the content or by changing anything that was contained in a .tre file could cause things to be called a bug in the rest of the game code when the problem could be in those files. From experience it is very hard to debug potential problems when you do not have everything that does into recreating the problem. Since one aspect of the change is to get more people working on the code it makes no sense to even suggest that access to everything should be restricted to just the SWGEmu core team.

In the end the owners of the SWGEmu project will create a license that does what they want it to do and most of our input will be ignored. When I made my post I was expressing that much of the discussion would remove any benefits for the project by the change and my support for them taking as long as they needed to get it right. I did not feel that I would need to post any more until the agreement was posted. The actions of others caused me to feel that I needed to say more.

Esquire
04-26-2015, 09:10 PM
That would be unfortunate but I'll wait for you folks to release further details. Personally, I feel a lot of this could be accomplished by working directly with those who run the servers (or do development) vs trying to accomplish it through licensing changes for everyone on a temporary basis. I'm sure many servers (or developers) out there would be more than happy to work with the SWGEmu staff on an individual case by case basis with requests for information when needed. Those problem servers who are attempting to "compete" would, in my opinion, be easy to isolate without effecting the rest of the community who support and wish to see the SWGEmu project succeed.

Thanks for the responses you guys (and ladies) have all given thus far, it's much appreciated.


Cheers

Acid, I believe I understand where you are coming from with these concerns. But, (and it's a big one), there has already been people that are claiming "ownership" of code/scripts/tre files/etc and have sold them. And ownership implies the right for sale. TA and SWGEMU is reacting to a problem, not creating one. And that problem could be a very large one for all of us if the problem draws the attention of entities involved. We are also trying to "piggyback" on an existing agreement between TA et al and SOE. Not once have I seen TA assign or transfer his rights given to him via that agreement.

The AGPL solution is probably the best one for all parties concerned. If there is no ownership and everyone's "stuff" is open source, there is no rights to sale and TA gets what he envisioned originally also. "SWG free for everyone".

As I see it, and I have a server also, in fact a couple of them I paid over 3K for and knew that I had no way to recoup that expense going in, it wouldn't hurt any of us to work together and with SWGEMU. I doubt that by giving out our code/files/etc that it is going to affect donations nor will it affect our playerbase one bit. It might help someone elses and that doesn't concern me either as SWGEMU's work is sure helping us. This isn't like Cryptic v SOE v Blizzard. We can't charge for the service nor can we make or attempt to profit from the measure. All you could realize is "bragging rights" and that will get exactly nothing at the bank.

Takhomasak
04-27-2015, 05:54 AM
Well, I like it, as an SWG fam.

Even if it's got thousands of players now... interest in this 13-year-old game is not going to last forever. The emphasis is to get to 1.0, then everyone can live their dream as they see fit. It's actually amazing that in the decade of work on EMU, nobody's just flat out made a better Star Wars game. That, of course, is why we're all still here.

As a modder and aspiring developer, I am very happy about this. The more hands we put the tools and information in, the sooner we'll get to 1.0. The sooner that happens, the sooner we'll all see what the game really could be.

Khieran
04-27-2015, 07:52 AM
Ok look, no one is really stating the obvious issue here, so i will. If all servers have the same code, what is the point of running seperate serversr? If its all the same, we may as well all play on the same server. It seems like individuality is being stripped away and we are going to forced into what amounts to online socialism where in order to be 'fair to everyone', everyone is forced to use the exact same thing. It removes all interest that i have had in this project since day 1.

Lolindir
04-27-2015, 09:31 AM
All code will be available, that don't mean everyone will have to merge it to their server... We will not take any code outside of 14.1. For what comes after we are done, read post 57 again.</SPAN>

Vlada
04-27-2015, 09:53 AM
Ok look, no one is really stating the obvious issue here, so i will. If all servers have the same code, what is the point of running seperate serversr? If its all the same, we may as well all play on the same server. It seems like individuality is being stripped away and we are going to forced into what amounts to online socialism where in order to be 'fair to everyone', everyone is forced to use the exact same thing. It removes all interest that i have had in this project since day 1.

As it was already stated, scripts/data should not be subject to AGPL, only changes made to the core files. Also, as i stated before, if you are worried about your individualism, or you don't want to share your work, just put on hold any changes you want to make to the core till 1.0 is released.

duffstone
04-27-2015, 11:43 AM
As it was already stated, scripts/data should not be subject to AGPL, only changes made to the core files. Also, as i stated before, if you are worried about your individualism, or you don't want to share your work, just put on hold any changes you want to make to the core till 1.0 is released.

OR... Keep your changes private... Correct? (knowing full well this is non-official ATM)...

Vlada
04-27-2015, 11:51 AM
OR... Keep your changes private... Correct? (knowing full well this is non-official ATM)...

No, by law you are obligated to make all changes made to the core3 open source and available to everyone or risk legal actions being taken against you. There is no legal way around it, and yes it is all very official.

Khieran
04-27-2015, 01:26 PM
Well, its not worth it to me just for a timer removal that i dont mind in the first place. I guess ill keep working in my current env and hold onto it till 1.0. Sounds like my best option.

duffstone
04-27-2015, 01:34 PM
No, by law you are obligated to make all changes made to the core3 open source and available to everyone or risk legal actions being taken against you. There is no legal way around it, and yes it is all very official.

so since it's official, can you start answering specific questions?

duffstone
04-27-2015, 01:39 PM
Well, its not worth it to me just for a timer removal that i dont mind in the first place. I guess ill keep working in my current env and hold onto it till 1.0. Sounds like my best option.

I think I'm probably boarding the same train as you, although I do have a couple QOL mods I'm working on that would be MUCH easier to test if I could leave the server going for a couple days. Still, scripts to reboot the core if it's down are easy enough to implement, and the only testing that gets the short end are the logged in AFK tests... Still, I'm giddy with anticipation to see how this all works out. :-)

-Duff

Khieran
04-27-2015, 01:41 PM
Like why had it gone from, 'thanks for donating your time and work' to 'donation is mandatory or go to court'?

Timbab
04-27-2015, 02:02 PM
Like why had it gone from, 'thanks for donating your time and work' to 'donation is mandatory or go to court'?

So entitled.

Same mindset that made things like Bloodfin happen. A group of entitled people using SWGEmu code close sourced, trash talking SWGEmu in the process, especially about how closed the engine is and how it's time locked, then using Emu code to pretend to have JTL working, etc, etc. In the end people legit thought Bloodfin was some kind of emulator, lol, competing with SWGEmu, and now believe SWGEmu is trying to steal them contents/codes, cause SWGEmu could never do it themselves and are stuck.


SWGEmu has every right to control their engine, the terms aren't even evil and as it's been said before, if you can't deal with it, just wait for 1.0.

Vlada
04-27-2015, 02:25 PM
We let you use our Engine3 and in return we expect nothing more from you than to make changes made to the core available to everyone. I don't see how that is a bad thing, engine without time restrictions, having access to latest bug and stability fixes, and being able to update your server with patches that will bring you closer to a final release aka 1.0. Everyone will befit from this.

Esquire
04-27-2015, 02:54 PM
Ok look, no one is really stating the obvious issue here, so i will. If all servers have the same code, what is the point of running seperate serversr? If its all the same, we may as well all play on the same server. It seems like individuality is being stripped away and we are going to forced into what amounts to online socialism where in order to be 'fair to everyone', everyone is forced to use the exact same thing. It removes all interest that i have had in this project since day 1.

How about it being just like live? Why did some people chose to play on Bria while others chose to play on Kauri? And some were fiercely loyal to their servers. All had the same exact code.

It will end up with certain niches that the specific developers and community creates. There will be PVP servers, PVE servers, RP servers, etc etc, just like live.

duffstone
04-27-2015, 03:32 PM
Correct, yet not quite accurate. SOE's live SWG was one game, one set of rules, one set of code. if server populations chose to segregate themselves into RP/PVP/PVE/Other categories, they did so using the exact same code and rule set.

SWGEmu is and will continue to be different in that respect. Without having any specifics "officially" available yet, the jist of what I've been led to believe by those who appear to know what's going on, is that ONLY changes to the base CORE3 code branch (prior to v1.0) will need to be made open source and either submitted back to SWGEmu by Gerrit patch / upload, or some other means to maintain an Open Source status of some type. All the scripting, .tre file content, additional non-core3 files will probably not be required to be open sourced. Again, this is all "Non-Official" right now in that no announcement has been made. It's just various bits posted here and there I've managed to glean.

Further, if you read the AGPL license itself, and any subsequent adaptations & implementations thereof, it seems that there are specific cases of private use being legit. Read up on it at Wikipedia, it's a good source, then do some googling. It seems that corporations who use AGPL opensource code to create custom, proprietary, internal applications, are not required to make their customizations Open source as long as the scope of their use remains internal, and is not distributed outside of the corporation. Granted, this is a tad different than what SWGEmu is doing, but still relevant to some extent I think. but I could be wrong, I"m no lawyer, and I could have completely misinterpreted the legal mumbo-jumbo easy enough.


My main interest is only in what I would be required to provide if I continue to hack / repurpose core3 like I have been doing now for ... many ... years. Primarily in generating MODS, custom or otherwise, for a non-14.1 standard environment. (new assets, new systems, etc..)


-Duff

Miztah
04-27-2015, 03:39 PM
If you read the entire thread, TA already said it would only apply to servers that are open to the public. Those who use the dev environment for their own playtoy (for whatever reason) or just to mess around with the code base would not be required to provide their source.

The rest of the speculation is pretty pointless until the actual announcement is made. Expecting those who use our open source code to keep that code open source to the public is not an unfair request. It would be smart for those servers to keep their code on a repository such as git or svn anyways, as it would allow them easy ability to track and, if necessary, revert code changes to their code base. It also allows us, if asked, to assist in resolving any stability issues other servers are having.

If you really want to keep your changes private, then wait until 1.0 is released. Your custom content or need for individuality is not our concern, completing the project is.

Esquire
04-27-2015, 03:48 PM
Correct, yet not quite accurate. SOE's live SWG was one game, one set of rules, one set of code. if server populations chose to segregate themselves into RP/PVP/PVE/Other categories, they did so using the exact same code and rule set.

SWGEmu is and will continue to be different in that respect. Without having any specifics "officially" available yet, the jist of what I've been led to believe by those who appear to know what's going on, is that ONLY changes to the base CORE3 code branch (prior to v1.0) will need to be made open source and either submitted back to SWGEmu by Gerrit patch / upload, or some other means to maintain an Open Source status of some type. All the scripting, .tre file content, additional non-core3 files will probably not be required to be open sourced. Again, this is all "Non-Official" right now in that no announcement has been made. It's just various bits posted here and there I've managed to glean.

Further, if you read the AGPL license itself, and any subsequent adaptations & implementations thereof, it seems that there are specific cases of private use being legit. Read up on it at Wikipedia, it's a good source, then do some googling. It seems that corporations who use AGPL opensource code to create custom, proprietary, internal applications, are not required to make their customizations Open source as long as the scope of their use remains internal, and is not distributed outside of the corporation. Granted, this is a tad different than what SWGEmu is doing, but still relevant to some extent I think. but I could be wrong, I"m no lawyer, and I could have completely misinterpreted the legal mumbo-jumbo easy enough.


My main interest is only in what I would be required to provide if I continue to hack / repurpose core3 like I have been doing now for ... many ... years. Primarily in generating MODS, custom or otherwise, for a non-14.1 standard environment. (new assets, new systems, etc..)


-Duff

Here is a legal opinion of AGPL being used on another application. Martindale.com has some others but is more of a atty resource. On this opinion link, there is also a link to the FAQs on AGPL site. I tend to stay far away from wikis.

https://civicrm.org/agpl-license-faqs

Khieran
04-27-2015, 05:00 PM
Ok thanks guys, your answers sound promising at least. Admittedly i poked you a bit just to see the responses without sugarcoating. Thanks for the honesty. And Tim i have nothing in common with bloodfin lol. They are getting what they deserve imo since they caused problems for others. I regained some respect for you all from this convo, thanks again!

acidanarchy
04-27-2015, 09:57 PM
So entitled.

Same mindset that made things like Bloodfin happen. A group of entitled people using SWGEmu code close sourced, trash talking SWGEmu in the process, especially about how closed the engine is and how it's time locked, then using Emu code to pretend to have JTL working, etc, etc. In the end people legit thought Bloodfin was some kind of emulator, lol, competing with SWGEmu, and now believe SWGEmu is trying to steal them contents/codes, cause SWGEmu could never do it themselves and are stuck.


SWGEmu has every right to control their engine, the terms aren't even evil and as it's been said before, if you can't deal with it, just wait for 1.0.

Since the elephant in the room is finally out....

Why not just deal with that server directly instead of strong arming the rest of the servers and developers who
1) Support the project
2) Don't claim ridiculous things
3) Are willing to work with the SWGEmu team in a fair and balanced manner

Seems like the rest of us are going to suffer because of 1

Timbab
04-27-2015, 10:09 PM
I don't see how their rules make anyone suffer though, unless a server can only claim to be attractive and unique by having features in the core that aren't implemented into SWGEmu yet anyway, it's all nullified with 1.0.

I mean the whole point is to get 1.0 out there as soon as possible, regardless if Bloodfin ever existed or not. Bloodfin wasn't the first and only to act incredibly entitled.

duffstone
04-27-2015, 10:17 PM
Since the elephant in the room is finally out....

Why not just deal with that server directly instead of strong arming the rest of the servers and developers who
1) Support the project
2) Don't claim ridiculous things
3) Are willing to work with the SWGEmu team in a fair and balanced manner

Seems like the rest of us are going to suffer because of 1

I think that's a bit strong given what little we know so far. WORST case, you have to open your Core3 specific source... If you're good enough to code "specialized functionality", specific for your community inside core3, then you're good enough to code an interpreter (API, whatever you want to call it) into Core3 that will read your "custom" code outside of the core3 AGPL license. It's just another manager. even if the rest of the world gets access to your new "Manager", they might see that you're interacting with the Jedi manager, the player manager, the tangible object manager, etc... but they won't be able to see WHAT you're feeding them in the outside process. Plus, it's highly doubtful that SWGEmu's staff will ever publish anything like that to the public GIT since it's so specific.

so really, it's NOT the end of the world. and it finally allows more communities freedom to expand into viable 24/7 online services. I think you'll see a treasure trove of goodness from this. Although, I highly doubt it helps 1.0 come about any quicker.

-Duff

nee2earth
04-27-2015, 10:20 PM
I highly doubt it helps 1.0 come about any quicker.



If more people report un-discovered bugs and help contribute reliable patches, it most certainly will.

acidanarchy
04-27-2015, 10:22 PM
I mean the whole point is to get 1.0 out there as soon as possible

I still, at the end of the day, fail to see how this change will do anything to expedite 1.0 as nearly all of the servers aside from the official SWGEmu server are managed by amateur and very inexperienced developers (people who likely don't contribute to Core3 development because they don't have the skills to do so properly).

How is gaining access to a non-Basilisk server going to do anything to contribute or expedite Core3 development to 1.0? What information could possible be of any value to the SWGEmu project roadmap?

Again, you said it quite well and it very clearly explains the underlying issue that this change is coming up. I still think there's far better ways to deal with "the problem child".


If you're good enough to code "specialized functionality", specific for your community inside core3, then you're good enough to code an interpreter (API, whatever you want to call it) into Core3 that will read your "custom" code outside of the core3 AGPL license. It's just another manager. even if the rest of the world gets access to your new "Manager", they might see that you're interacting with the Jedi manager, the player manager, the tangible object manager, etc... but they won't be able to see WHAT you're feeding them in the outside process. Plus, it's highly doubtful that SWGEmu's staff will ever publish anything like that to the public GIT since it's so specific.

This is exactly one of the points I was hinting to and this is the part that really did not sit well with me



remove any time restrictions from our Engine3 for all those that go open source and make all their stuff available to any and all SWG Emulator communities.

Which in my previous post and example I had clearly laid out a case where "if" I paid someone to develop a giant pink dinosaur with a laser beam that fired on players and turned them into little fuzzy bunny rabbits, how could that possibly be of ANY value at all to the 1.0 roadmap?



If more people report un-discovered bugs and help contribute reliable patches, it most certainly will.

I agree but at the same time if you have a server with, say, 10 people playing vs a server with 2,000 people playing.... which one is most likely to find a bug first? Furthermore, if a bug is found on the server with 10 people, and that server is using the same code that the server with 2,000 people are using, and the same bug is already reported.... what is the point of forcing the server with 10 people to make their entire server environment open source when it's the same exact code that's already being used on the server with 2,000 people? Who is going to be the server code police that's going to root through hundreds of thousands of lines of code and how much time are they going to devote to doing so which could otherwise be focused on the 1.0 roadmap?


In short, I don't feel that mass punishment and micromanagement of all servers is the right way forward just because 1 server is a problem. ("Well, Private Pyle had a jelly donut in his foot locker, everyone get on your face and give me 100 pushups"). Like I suggested previously, I think the SWGEmu staff would find most all servers are more than willing to work and cooperate on a case by case situation, much like a freedom of information act request which is processed from initiator to organization and then transmitted back to the initiator.

Vlada
04-27-2015, 10:52 PM
Which in my previous post and example I had clearly laid out a case where "if" I paid someone to develop a giant pink dinosaur with a laser beam that fired on players and turned them into little fuzzy bunny rabbits, how could that possibly be of ANY value at all to the 1.0 roadmap?


It doesn't need to be, but if its a change made to the core then it has to be open source. Its not really our problem you just thrown your money away on something useless, its your money, you decide how you want to waste it. If you don't want to share, don't make changes to the core before 1.0.

acidanarchy
04-28-2015, 03:12 AM
Its not really our problem you just thrown your money away on something useless, its your money, you decide how you want to waste it. If you don't want to share, don't make changes to the core before 1.0.

I'm not saying you guys need to be concerned with how other people spend their money. It isn't anyone's concern at all, that's obvious and it isn't even about money as that was simply an example. I was actually raising more concern over protection of people's original creations and work than anything and just seeking clarification on the SWGEmu staff's position on the extremely vague information that was been released to date regarding this issue.

I'm sorry if my posts come across as negative or beating the dead horse but this has quickly developed into a very disheartening and disappointing situation to say the least. I was hoping for more support towards the community than this but I suppose I will take the "don't let the door hit you on the way out" vibe as a hint.

duffstone
04-28-2015, 03:43 AM
I'm not saying you guys need to be concerned with how other people spend their money. It isn't anyone's concern at all, that's obvious and it isn't even about money as that was simply an example. I was actually raising more concern over protection of people's original creations and work than anything and just seeking clarification on the SWGEmu staff's position on the extremely vague information that was been released to date regarding this issue.

I'm sorry if my posts come across as negative or beating the dead horse but this has quickly developed into a very disheartening and disappointing situation to say the least. I was hoping for more support towards the community than this but I suppose I will take the "don't let the door hit you on the way out" vibe as a hint.

../horse/beating/begin.sh

I gave a great example how to get around the AGPL license issue above. it's not hard to write a plugin / API / manager / whatever you want to call it that specifically relates commands / communications / etc to an external to core3 binary or library that can do whatever you want it to do, without being required to share that library. At least how I understand it. I'm sure if it's THAT big of a deal, you'll see some sort of universal (or otherwise easy to use) plug-in / add-in type module written for Core3 that all will be free to use, THANKS to the switch to AGPL.

Realistically speaking, this is the only way to ensure your code stays yours, and secret, even in a GPL environment. It's what the TA and Oru did for Engine3, and it's what I do at work all the time (just not in C, mostly vb.net).

and before the flames start: Easy is a relative term I understand. I couldn't write it in C, but I could in vb.net (or rather using the VS20xx interface to write .net code, it's just super simple and you don't have to be an uber geek to do big things).

killall begin.sh

Vlada
04-28-2015, 07:14 AM
I'm not saying you guys need to be concerned with how other people spend their money. It isn't anyone's concern at all, that's obvious and it isn't even about money as that was simply an example. I was actually raising more concern over protection of people's original creations and work than anything and just seeking clarification on the SWGEmu staff's position on the extremely vague information that was been released to date regarding this issue.

I'm sorry if my posts come across as negative or beating the dead horse but this has quickly developed into a very disheartening and disappointing situation to say the least. I was hoping for more support towards the community than this but I suppose I will take the "don't let the door hit you on the way out" vibe as a hint.

Like i said, if you make changes to the core then your original content needs to open source, even if its a pink bunny, of you want it protected don't make those changes before 1.0.

oginecka
04-28-2015, 08:19 PM
Reading up on this discussion, I see it as a largely positive thing. If anything, it opens up the development to anyone interested.

As for licensing, perhaps many of us are getting distracted in technicalities and not thinking about this practically. The way I see it, if you are a dev working on a SWGEMU code that "replicates" vanilla SWG, you should share it with everyone. As a potential server owner, vanilla SWG functionality will not make you stand out anyway, so it is in everyone's best interest to share all of those commits with the whole community. Not only is this more than fair to the SWGEMU team that made it all possible, it is in the server owner's best interest. A healthy community of players with a stable selection of play servers should be what everyone wants (SWGEMU staff / server owners / players alike).

If you are adding code that changes SWGEMU in a way that is not in line with "vanilla" SWG, and a variation of your code is not helpful to those working on "vanilla" SWG, I doubt anyone cares about your code at all. If you are creating a playable tauntaun race, good for you. If you are creating sarlacc baby pets and happen to develop creature handler code in the process, it is fair you share the creature handler code and keep your sarlacc pets private.

That's what my common sense tells me anyway. Some food for thought. :)

HappyDay
04-28-2015, 11:16 PM
Nice idea, to make them opensource hehe. Keep it up!

My little suggestions ;)
1)If your team has a really great reverse engineers - decompile client. Do it. And make your own ones with customs.
2)Dont care about licenses. As you may understands, for example, good specialists can "unlock" & change Core3 engine.
(+ Themida, VMProtect, x64, nanomites, stack necromancy)...needless to say, if they wanna share them - they share, if nope...so...


Anyways - great gob and keep them up!




Best Regards, HappyDay, R@geZone hack& private servers community.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/veEUo7rC7Rs" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Aso
05-12-2015, 03:01 PM
Any update on this?

Vlada
05-12-2015, 03:06 PM
Any update on this?

I've been asking this for the past 2 weeks, apparently both Scurby and TheAnswer were pretty busy IRL in the past week or so, the whole thing was pretty much on hold for a while. I think they are working on it now though.

Aso
05-12-2015, 03:17 PM
I've been asking this for the past 2 weeks, apparently both Scurby and TheAnswer were pretty busy IRL in the past week or so, the whole thing was pretty much on hold for a while. I think they are working on it now though.

Thanks for the fast response. That pesky real life.... :)

darth8875
05-14-2015, 04:26 PM
So what is the issue of bad blood with Bloodfin? Apparently I am out of the loop....

Also, is there a "idiot level" guide on how to set up a private swgemu server anywhere? Or will there be one in the future?

Vlada
05-14-2015, 04:31 PM
So what is the issue of bad blood with Bloodfin? Apparently I am out of the loop...

Here is where my facebook post comes in to play.


Well for start we don't really like to discuss play servers here. But I will say this, and keep in mind that I'm not talking about one specific play server here, but most of them. Not everyone likes vanilla Pre-CU, not everyone likes that we aren't adding content or fixing that they think should be fixed. Our path has been set a long time ago and SWGEmu will not stray from that path.

Play servers have various ways of attracting new community members, from adding new armors, weapons, even planets, their custom Jedi systems, x3 to x10 XP to pointing out that Basilisk will be wiped at some point (which of course everyone knows its true, even though that point is far, far away), bashing other play server staff or SWGEmu staff, calling all other servers corrupt, making up stories about CSR's doing favors for friends etc. Check reddit /r/swgemu and /r/swg or their FB pages, their forums, they are full of stuff like that.

SWGEmu doesn't bother with play servers because we still have work to do, we don't advertise, we don't talk ill of one server or the other on our forums or on social media. Usually we just delete any and all topics started about other servers because we are a development project and we need to be focused on development, nothing else. Those that don't care to help us or don't agree with the way we do things are of course always free to join other play server communities, but we don't need nor want other communities drama here.


Also, is there a "idiot level" guide on how to set up a private swgemu server anywhere? Or will there be one in the future?

And here is everything you need to know about setting up our development environment: Development Documentation - *All Links and Information Inside* (http://www.swgemu.com/forums/showthread.php?t=120093)

Halyn
05-15-2015, 01:30 PM
As someone who's working on a play server project, I find the bad-mouthing of the SWGEmu team to be extremely poor form. Without their work, none of these play servers would even exist.

Tiars
05-16-2015, 02:08 PM
As someone who's working on a play server project, I find the bad-mouthing of the SWGEmu team to be extremely poor form. Without their work, none of these play servers would even exist.

exactly, but some do feel a need to do it. My guess is that they hope that the badmouthing will attract people to them. But as you point out it delays what all the play server projects really want, the release of version 1.0.

Esquire
05-16-2015, 03:26 PM
We had an EMU guy in our vent for an entire evening this past week. He was both very helpful and very informative. We worked out a methodology of reporting bugs (for the core) found on our server and even bug fixes being done via our team. Along with new additions to content/instances/planets/etc.

After that convo, I doubt we'll hide even scripts from other server owners/SWGEMU. That would entail up to and including our server re-set scripts and jedi unlocks. To be honest with people screaming about their jedi unlocks, all I've seen from the other servers I have accounts on is after all the "NERF WARS" calls (remember that from live) jedi end up being NGE-ed into non-existence or nothing more than easy kills, anyway. No great need to unlock just to be fodder. (However, we're not and will not be taking that tactic, I hated NERF WARS and want nothing to do with it on my server)

TA and SWGEMU, you have our full support. And your right, we all should be working together.

idej
05-20-2015, 10:05 AM
Do they have an estimated time when they plan on doing this?

Vlada
05-20-2015, 10:27 AM
We hope to have it done by the end of the week.

jstruble
05-20-2015, 09:14 PM
Vlada, just curious, if I read your OP correctly, how are communities going to share their work? Normally private servers aren't supported on the forums I thought?

Vlada
05-20-2015, 09:28 PM
Vlada, just curious, if I read your OP correctly, how are communities going to share their work? Normally private servers aren't supported on the forums I thought?

Everything will be explained in the next announcement.

jstruble
05-20-2015, 09:35 PM
Everything will be explained in the next announcement.

Thank you :)

Aso
05-20-2015, 10:47 PM
Vlada, just curious, if I read your OP correctly, how are communities going to share their work? Normally private servers aren't supported on the forums I thought?

I'm assuming you would just set up a Public Repo. I already took the initiative and made my Bitbucket repo public a few days after this was announced.

mechsouls
05-24-2015, 08:55 AM
As the owner of Bloodfin, I look forward to these changes, and will examine the guidelines regarding our code releasal. I am very curious how this will pan out with older servers such as Bloodfin and Hydian Way and Veers running older engines and the restricted 2.5 hour limitations, and the grandfathered gpl.

Timbab
05-26-2015, 12:04 AM
As the owner of Bloodfin, I look forward to these changes, and will examine the guidelines regarding our code releasal. I am very curious how this will pan out with older servers such as Bloodfin and Hydian Way and Veers running older engines and the restricted 2.5 hour limitations, and the grandfathered gpl.

Amazing.

The balls.

P.S. mechsouls isn't heat.

Vlada
05-26-2015, 09:54 AM
Here we go: http://www.swgemu.com/forums/showthread.php?t=161680