Jump to content


OJP (Open Jedi Project)


Recommended Posts

At the end of the day - the OJP is run by majority. We have a pretty good idea who the initial contributors are going to be. So let's see what everyone else thinks. If most people don't want any kind of rules for mods built off the OJP, then I'll go along with that.

I'll state that I think it's potentially a bad idea, but I'm happy to go with the majority on this one...


i.e. I would rather have an OJP which had no rules and some risk involved than have no OJP at all because no-one could live with any rules...!



I think it's fine to make the OJP source available to all without some kind of 'request' e-mail. That makes practical sense as well.

(btw though, with our old proposed system, once you had access - I believe that meant FULL access. I don't believe we were proposing people had to re-request every time that wanted to look at a particular file!)


But I still think some kind of 'rules', for building completely new mods from OJP source are worth-while having.


When's the last time you saw someone rip off an open source library for C or C++ like libpng or libjpg?


While I'm not exactly sure what those library's are about, I'm guessing they are meant for professional software development. Well, were in a different position because were not in the professional development arena. And so saying no-one has ripped off these libraries is not a direct analogy between what might happen to the OJP.

I agree, it would make no sense for a professional to 'rip-off' open source code. Their not coding for fame - their getting paid to do a job...


The fact is were talking about modding for a computer game - there is a different spectrum of mentality. The incident you mentioned above is a clear example of this. (I'm a bit confused by the fact you seem to have stated a clear example of abuse of open source which is known to have happenned, and then said 'So let's not have any rules this time round'?!)


Will it slow down development? Ermm, potentially I guess it might do - a small bit in some cases. I guess I have to give you that one. But I'd say it's worth it - when the alternative is what happenned before.


Will it scare off people? Were you scared to post on this forum because there were some rules that go along with that activity?


Will people freely contribute to the OJP with NO safe-guards in place against using the code without credit, or suddenly 10 copy-cat's of their mod popping up?


Patches are something different - these are not affected by the rules for building new mods. In fact, as far as patches I would say no hard and fast rules at all. I think maybe we want to be sure that the patch is actually an improvement of somekind to the game - maybe have a coding standard (but I think the admins would have to possibly accept a little bit of code 'clean-up' duty) - but apart from that - anything goes I'd say. Let's let anybody contribute whatever they like. The more, the merrier.


But I think building a new mod off the OJP source is a different story...


Quite frankly, we're like nobodys now, we are in no position to be restricting those who want to help us.


This is looking at things backwards. The rules were proposing should be benifical to all - not just the people who happen to admin it.

And we wouldn't be restricting anybody who wanted to help us. At least that wouldn't be the intention - if we did restrict people who wanted to help, then that would be our fault.

The intention would be to restrict those who want to abuse the open nature of development...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 243
  • Created
  • Last Reply

If it IS a co-incidence, (it's a bit unlikely, but it's possible after all) then fair enough. It's not a problem, we'll work something out.


If it's NOT a co-incidence though, well, I rest my case on the maturity of some modders... :rolleyes:


I think we need to talk to him first though.

(Who knows - maybe he was just trying to get the ball rolling, in an unorganised kind of way!)


I'll leave a quick comment when I get home...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've sent the following to the dude. I've also contacted the major file servers about the issue. I haven't ask them to remove the files yet as I want to hear this dude's side of the story first. No need to take forceful action if it was just a honest mistake.




We've just noticed that you've posted a mod with the name OJP (Open Jedi Project).


We have been using this name for sometime now. We don't want to cause problems with duplicate mod names and we'd like to hear your side of the story. However, we have proof that we've been using this name for sometime now and are willing to take this evidence to all the major file servers if we find that you're just attempting to steal/slam our name. Please contact me ASAP.



Razor Ace

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by razorace

It's really just a matter of how worried you guys are about people using your works, with or without credit, and whither you want to try to help the community out with the similarity clause. But if you're not willing to have additional rules, the chance of people abusing the project is higher.


I'm basically fine with full open as long as people don't use my works commerically. However, I think the similarity clause would help things quite a bit.


However, I'm against the task list concept. While I am recording a list of possible fixes, additions, etc, I've found from experience that people will NOT do anything if you give them a task to complete. I have no problem with simply having a "suggestions" list but anything beyond that WILL NOT WORK. The only way things get done in the modding community is when people are directly interested in doing it.


1. If someone rips it off, just get the mod sites to take it down. Any decent administrator is smart enough to see something like that, and to avoid a legal mess, they'll probably comply.


2. They couldn't use it commercially because the EULA prohibits commercial use of any mod. The only way is if someone bought a Q3 engine license and somehow got our code in there, but that's like impossible.


3. No, I don't mean assigned tasks, I mean just keep a list of what people are doing on a forum or website so that other people don't go mucking around in it by accident. Like bob12435 can be like, "hey guys I'm going to do some new physics thing" and then it gets posted on the forum so no one else mucks with his files.


RenegadeOfPhunk, libpng and libjpg are exactly what they sound like, libraries for loading PNG and JPEG files. They're completely open for any kind of software development.


I understand there's a different mentality (and what examle were you talking about where I said it was abused??), but still, think about it. This is a very large project with a lot of developers. It's the first. If someone wants to rip us off, let them try. Everyone's going to know it's a ripoff, so no one's going to use it. I sure as ****ing hell wouldn't take some dumbasses modifications from like the GTK and use them in my software, I want the real thing, and I know everyone else who's a decent developer would too.


I'm not sure what to think of that guy's hilt pack, but from his posts, he just sounds confused.



My basic thought is that rules are going to scare people away. Public CVS access is a must. If anyone tries to steal it from us, let them try, we will just smite them. Let's assume our path is rather rocky, so let's say it will happen. But how many times can it happen? Once? Twice? Over the course of (hopefully) many years? That doesn't sound very threatening, nor does "omgom guys I maed teh ojp-- mod it r lek teh ojp but I changed teh menuz!", etc. If it becomes a serious problem, then we can take action, but right now we are in no position to be making demands of developers who want to use our stuff or contribute.



Edit: Also to support my belief that this is not a problem, look at GtkRadiant and Q3Map2. They both have the source code readily available, there has never been a problem. If some jackass ripped it, called it OmniGtkRadiant or something, would you use it? No, of course you wouldn't, same with Q3Map2. People want reliable stuff, not some immitation crap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone's going to know it's a ripoff, so no one's going to use it. I sure as ****ing hell wouldn't take some dumbasses modifications from like the GTK and use them in my software, I want the real thing, and I know everyone else who's a decent developer would too.


Hmmm. It's possible were getting crossed wires here Emon. When you refer to the 'rip-off', sounds like to me your refering to a different open source project who rips off our code and then hands that out to other mod makers (?). If so, that's not what I'm talking about.


...I'm talking about someone taking OJP code, claiming it as their own and making their own mod out of it, changing enough of it so that many people are fooled into thinking it's original work and then releasing that mod to the public, without any recognition to the original authors.


In this case, it's not developers (decent or otherwise) who are being presented with a 'rip-off', it's the gamers themselves.


Can this happen? YES - it HAS happenned. You've already mentioned the 'incident', and I don't want to mention it directly again (because that's when things start to get heated up around here - which CLEARLY shows it was indeed quite a BIG problem).



1. If someone rips it off, just get the mod sites to take it down. Any decent administrator is smart enough to see something like that, and to avoid a legal mess, they'll probably comply.



I think it's easier to get the guidelines clear right from the start, rather than having to write to every single mod site and tell them to start ripping files down.


Why not try and stop those files getting put up in the first place?!

OK - you may argue there is little we can do about it if somebody wants to do this - especially if we want it to be as open as possible. And yes, you may be right. But why not at least make it very clear this is against our 'rules' (and when I say OUR, I mean ALL contributors, not just a handful of 'high-and-mighty' admins), and if you do this, were going to take steps. If we do make this clear, it is possibe they may not try to begin with, saving not only us, but the mod site admins a whole load of grief we and they don't want!



look at GtkRadiant and Q3Map2. They both have the source code readily available, there has never been a problem.


I am almost certain the code for these programs will come under the GPL - which the Quake I and II engine open source code are also under.

Check here for the 'rules' of that license.


(I did try and find out for sure whether this was the case directly, but half the links I found to try and get more details about gtkradiant and Q3Map2 weren't working - so I gave up!

But put it this way - I don't know of ANY 'professional' open source code which DOESN'T include some kind of licence similar to the GPL...)


If you know better in these specific cases you've mentioned, then by all means post a link and I'll happily take it back. But I'd be very surprised if you do...


Look, I'm not trying to say we should be like ultra-professionals - just for the sake of it. I know this is just a mod were working on. I don't see this as legal stuff. Because at the end of the day (I know Razor disagrees with me), I don't think taking legal action over mods is either practical or justified.


...these 'rules' were talking about - as far as I'm concerned - are just about:


a. A certain level of common cortosey and respect


b. Reassuring people that if they contribute, the OJP will do whatever it can to make sure they will get the appropiate credit whenever their feature is used / played.


c. Try and stop copy-cat mods appearing all over the place.


Now the copycat mod thing - possibly - is the least important out of the three. But still - why not try and stop this? Basically, if you've made a realtively minor change or addition, please don't go and make a whole new mod.

Instead, please just add it back into the OJP.


...is that really SO much to ask?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whoa! Okay, hold up, you didn't have to type more than the first few lines. I understand what you are talking about now. I thought you meant a duplicate of OJP, not someone claiming the code as theirs.


This is really easy to fix. In our license agreement, which we can put on our site or on our CVS thing, we just say that if you use code without credit, we can take legal action. The only other thing I can see to stop this is to limit distribution of the source code, which may severely hurt the development of the project, and like I said, scare people away, and would also seem kind of elitist I think, and demanding.


If someone still tries to dick with us, well, there isn't much we can do, other than talk to the mod sites to get them to take the stuff down. If we wanted to threaten with legal action or something, any mod site not run on Geocities is going to comply.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is really easy to fix. In our license agreement, which we can put on our site or on our CVS thing, we just say that if you use code without credit, we can take legal action.


This is all Razor and myself have been saying from the beginning! Well, I'll let Razor speak for himself. I know that's what I meant at least...


I'd thought I(we) had made ourselves pretty clear too... :confused:


(Although I still think legal action is a little over-the-top, but whatever).


Oh well, at least were all on the same page now :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is, simply telling people to give "proper credit" isn't going to work. A lot of the problems with "the incident" was that there was credit given but it wasn't enough to prevent glory hogging.


If you think credit hogging is more acceptable than some useage rules, that's fine. But we're going to have to accept the conceqences either way.


Personally, I'd rather error on the side of caution and only have the cream of the crop material (since those are probably the only people able/willing to submit) rather than have to suck it up when people totally abuse my work.


Besides, I don't feel like having to babysit crappy modders when they submit code that is in no shape to be intergrated into the project.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And the only other option is limited source code distribution, which I am strongly against.


Please correct me if I am mistaken, but BOFH actually did credit a lot of the code he used. And besides, this is one guy, it's not worth it to drag everything down because something like that might happen again. And did those who got the code stolen ever bother to contact sites to get it removed, or did they just flame BOFH in the forums, because I seem to remember that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not for limited source code distrobution either.


However, I have no problems with us denying access to known troublemakers. And the only way to do that is to require everyone to contact us before giving out the password. With the repository I got set up, I have to pass out a password to the repository anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True, but there's nothing wrong with at least trying to keep them out. If we keep records and find out that a banned individual has gotten the code, we might be able to track it back to whoever did it. Plus, we could act immediately against the banned individual instead of having to try to be "fair".


EDIT: Plus, we can do additional things like knowing who's using our code legally and so on.


Any luck with sourceforge?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, that won't matter. You cannot prevent someone from getting the code if they want it. It's much easier and more effective to just get the crap taken down, this is going to hinder development for legit coders. Especially when you want to take all these precautions because of one guy who, at least I haven't seen in many ages. Are you trying to inflate his ego or what? We should let it go and not be intimidated by idiots.


SourceForge hasn't replied, but I can try a few other places.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How's it going to hinder legit developers? All you gotta do is email one of the moderators and tell them who you are and why you want access. If they're too lazy to do that, they're going to be too lazy to configure their copy of CVS to access the repository or too lazy to pimp their code up to an acceptable level anyway.


On the useage side of things, the rules I've suggested have two main purposes:


1. To help ensure the rights (and credit) of the modders to their work. A lot of people are very concerned about this. If strict rules are the difference between people contributing and not contributing, we need to have the rules in place.


2. To hopefully limit the widespread of "me too" mods that hurt the JK2 community.


If we're not too concerned about either of the two, that's fine. We need to do whatever is the most likely to get good modders to pretipate. I think that the good modders need to feel that their code is going to be properly creditted than allowing super free access.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just some input:


About the whole credit issue. I think we shouldn't be so egotistical about it... i say screw it. Sure a credits list for the project is desirable, but if someone uses our work i don't think we should be so insistant on them giving their sources away. Sure it's ideal, and we should request that it be done, but honestly not everyone's going to do it no matter what you say. Hopefully when this thing takes off it'll be really popular and thus, if someone takes code from OJP and uses it in their mod people are just going to know where it came from anyway.


And about how open the source code is... i think it should be fully open. Downloadable from the website, and up to date with the latest build that's been released. I really can't see it any other way. As Emon has been saying, i really think that could potentially slow down production too.


Also, maybe this has already been figured out, but this is how i was thinking the whole source code updating process would be handled:


[*]The client sends a moderator an email with the source code that they're wanting to contibute to the project

[*]Then the update will have to be offically accepted

[*]If it is accepted, it'll be added to the base project as a new update (by a moderator)

[*]Then a beta test will be sent back to the client, for them to test it out to make sure it was implimented properly

[*]The client will then have to reply, confirming this

[*]Then the new build is released to the public


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, to me it seems most people are saying:


a. Rules are scaring a load of us


b. Some don't think the rules can actually be 'enforced' that easiely anyway in the first place.


I think a. is unfounded. 99% of us do not need to be worried by the rules, because most modders I've met have been perfectly nice and reasonable people. i.e. the rules will most likely not end up affecting most of as at all.

...at most, you might get the odd suggestion about - I donno - about maybe this feature should be cvar'ed or slightly altered because it clashes with this feature already in the OJP etc.etc. Maintenance type stuff - just to keep the OJP nice and organised. That's all it will be for most of us.


THe main 'rules' are only to combat a minority who wish to abuse stuff. Who knows - that minority may not even be a problem this time round. But I think it would be unwise to leave things open for that kind of abuse this time round again.



Concerning b., however, I think people may be somewhat correct about this - and why it's not really worth trying to make things TOO restrictive in an effort to try and make this 'water-tight', because I don't think this is possible.

I think it's enough to have the rule in place and say 'We will do whatever we can to enforce this'. This will deter some people. Maybe not all - granted. But there is NOTHING we can do about the very possibility of rips without making the source much less OPEN. And I agree with Emon here - this is the whole point of the project in the first place.


SO I say give out access freely, but make sure the 'rules' are nice and clear, and let people know we will take 'some kind of action' if they don't follow them. There ARE steps we can take - it's not like people will be able to have completely free reign here.


Assuming the OJP becomes fairly universally recognised, that in itself gives it some 'pulling' power around the community etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can see you wanting to stop the "me too" mods (which, by the way, were gameplay based, we aren't going to be making any gameplay changes probably, removing any possibility of that), but having people e-mail for the source code is not going to help! I bet you we'd end up authorizing every damn e-mail and it won't have mattered any way. Tracking? Please, what's that going to let you do? It all boils down to you contacting a site and making them take the mod off, how is knowing who e-mailed you going to help? They could have sent an anonymous e-mail. Sure, you can trace it, but how does that help! Oh no, you can tell a guy lives in Germany that stole our code! Whoop dee ****ing doo, we still call up LucasFiles and tell them to take it down.


Afterall, this is all over ONE person who I haven't seen in a long time. If we're doing this entirely to stop BOFH from stealing our code, then please, grow up. It's also inflating his ego!


If something severe happens, then let's limit the code distribution. But for now, I don't see a damn reason to.


Additionally, I think we should release the code in actual mod form for end users. JA's got more map entities, but not enough. It would be nice if mappers could make maps to use OJP's public releases. Since it doesn't make gameplay changes, it would be ideal for servers that don't run mods and want to run some fancy levels. And also, we'd have to release only major revisions, because no one wants to update OJP every other week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Additionally, I think we should release the code in actual mod form for end users. JA's got more map entities, but not enough. It would be nice if mappers could make maps to use OJP's public releases. Since it doesn't make gameplay changes, it would be ideal for servers that don't run mods and want to run some fancy levels. And also, we'd have to release only major revisions, because no one wants to update OJP every other week.


I agree, we should definelty have an official OJP mod released and playable by the public.


Actually, my idea I was thinking about would be to possibly have a couple of different versions. I haven't really thought this through thouroughly yet - so don't dismiss the idea straight away! - but I was thinking of something along the lines of:


OJP Basic


This would be JUST bug fixes and anything which are improvments, but don't alter basic gameplay - like you've said Emon.




This includes all the OJP basic stuff - PLUS...

all the 'cool' extra (gameplay changing) features cvar'ed up. This is for the less serious gamer who just wants to chill out, and doesn't bother too much about conformity etc. (There are a lot of players like this)


...and maybe even...




With some established tweaks. This one would probably end up being quite a sticking point for some people, and could end up being like a 1.03, 1.04 patch senario!! :eek:

So, not even sure we want to go there - but it's a possibility anyway...



I just seems to me that if we only release an OJP mod which doesn't alter gameplay AT ALL, there could be tons of features which never get seen in the OJP mod.


Then you have to rely on these features getting used in other mods. If they happen to never get used, or only get used in rather obscure mods, then - doh - they basically went to the trouble of adding a feature that didn't really get used - even if the feature was actually quite good!


SO I think having 2 or 3 versions of the OJP mod sorts that out.

i.e. if you do add something to the OJP, you are almost certainly assured to have it show up in at least 1 of the OJP variations.

And you cater to a wider variety of gamer too.


Of course,I wouldn't start making 10 different 'original' OJP mods - that's a bit OTT, and you've just started the whole fragmentation thing yourself!! But I think 2 or 3 types are reasonable...

Link to comment
Share on other sites


This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Create New...