HOVERRACE.COM: fast - fun - free

HoverRace is an open-source 3D racing game.
It is currently Sat Jul 21, 2018 6:57 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 57 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 09, 2006 8:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 8:42 pm
Posts: 256
Location: WA, USA
I think Vigilante has some valid points here.

but i want everyone to ponder this question:
What gives you the right to be apart of this project? (geared toward each of us).

One of the key things that hoverrace has always been about is community. And what Vigilante is trying to, is make any improvements be fair to the community. There should be some centralized plan of action to take if the source is ever recived (will the breifing tomorrow go into that?)
I am curious on this 'official' version, who is all involved with that, and why are those certain people involved

ONce again, as Vigilante said i will support any action that gets performed in any way that i can. I am not a code, i am a designer, and i am afraid the design techniques i have been taught, are completely different than how hoverrace works.

_________________
^i posted that
Check out my website


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 09, 2006 8:22 pm 
Offline
Source Developer
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2005 4:15 pm
Posts: 1242
Location: Atlanta, GA
Okay. Not to start a flamewar, but exactly how much have you done to get the source code? Sure, you didn't have the necessary contact information and I wasn't going to give it to you because I didn't want Richard to get overloaded with stuff, but still, I took the initiative. Not to rub that in as if to say, "I'm better" or whatsuch, but still.

Also, technically, under the BSD liscense which Richard is releasing the code under, it doesn't have to be open-sourced. Read the text. In a nutshell:
1) Grokksoft gets credit for HR
2) Grokksoft's name can't be used to advertise it anymore

Nowhere in there does it say explicitly that it has to be open-sourced. If I did that, though, that would mean I would have lied to Richard [because I told him I would open-source it] and I have rudimentary morals so I won't do that.

Anyways, at the expense of my project I'll explain, with important points in bold so those with small attention spans can skim.

The plan was discussed only between Austin, Lars, and I because we're the ones who are currently leading the modification charge, though that's a little too figurative for my tastes. Lars knows how the game works, I know some stuff about the internals of the game and larger ideas for development, and Austin runs the site. Plus, nobody else was around volunteering when we discussed this. Could be my own fault because I wasn't looking, but that's irrelevant now.

There will only be one official version of HoverRace that the IMR will recognize. I won't go into the details of how the security mechanism will work, for security via obscurity reasons, but any version that the IMR does not recognize will be treated as one of the cheat versions is treated now - the IMR will not let them race people who have the official version.

The development will go much in the same way as the Linux kernel. That isn't accurate down to the detail, but the general concept is. People who hack away at the code can ask to have their changes added to the codebase, and if their changes suit the goals of the development project, the changes get put in.

"But what are the goals?" you ask. As it stands, and at least in my opinion, development on the HoverRace source will serve only to improve flaws within the game while attempting to make playing easier. Physics must stay the same to preserve the uniqueness of the game. If you want changed physics, go play FreeHover.

Goals for development have been discussed before. Refer to other threads.

Naturally, there will need to be some form of leadership behind this development, much like Linus is to the Linux kernel. As it stands, the leadership is Lars, Austin, and myself. Why? Because we were in the right place at the right time. Not only that, but Austin runs the site, Lars has a great technical knowledge of the intracies of the game, and I'm writing HCU. Don't think I'm putting myself on a pedestal because I'm not trying to. That's just how it worked out. I would think HaP would want to have some sort of control, as he is kind of in control of the IMR source. But he's pretty inactive for the most part.

So where's the democracy behind this? I don't know. If you do productive things for the game and in the code, and your modifications suit the goals of the project, then your changes are much more likely to be improved. Doesn't sound all that much like a democracy, does it? Well, that's probably because it's not all that much of one. It's more of a system guided by social vectors.

But it's for the good of the game. Why would any of us want to destroy the game? Those with malicious intent have been marked and already aren't trusted [I'm not saying this is you, Gothrey, don't get me wrong]. Remember, if you don't like the direction it's going, fork the code. Have a game of your own. Under the way it's licensed you can even close the source.

So now you're probably angry because it's not a perfect democracy and all that crap. Look at the United States government. Look at Congress. The system is so broken it's not even funny. It's inefficient and it gets more complicated every day. Not the way this game needs to be, and it's not the way it will be. Those may be harsh, demanding words but that's how it goes.

You've seen how I run HCU. I try to leave things as open as possible for other people to make suggestions and put them in. But nobody really ever steps up to the plate and starts hacking out some code. I have a feeling the HoverRace source would be slightly different, but it's altogether possible it could go the same way.

This may be an oligarchy, but it's a benevolent one, and you have the choice to get up and fork the code at any moment. If more people like your idea, we'll be forced to implement it in the end or we'll face the loss of our userbase. Simple capitalism.

Remember, if you had jumped the gun you could have the source right now and act as democratic as you please. I think, though, the current plan is the one that will best follow the goal. If I misstated that goal or an overwhelming majority does not agree, then perhaps the goals will change.

A semi-relevant quote I came across today:

"Democracy as a government relies upon the ability of factions to compromise on divisive issues through rational debate instead of violence. The current political power brokers have figured out how to short circuit this process by focusing national attention on issues which are based on differences of non-negotiable, irrational moral sentiment, and are thus not subject to resolution through rational reconciliation. They've broken democracy."

_________________
<www.igglybob.com>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 09, 2006 8:22 pm 
Thanks Castro...

As I at least tried to explain in previous posts:
I don't plan on being a part of this group/team/plan/idea... I just want to know that everything's sorted out ahead of time, and everyone's had their say...

That's why I started this thread to begin with... I want to avoid chaos, keep the community together, and support open-source democracy.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 09, 2006 8:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 1:26 pm
Posts: 54
Location: Quebec, Canada
Castro wrote:
but i want everyone to ponder this question:
What gives you the right to be apart of this project? (geared toward each of us).



It's not so much of a right as to having the knowledge to do something with the Source. The IMR source is hard enough to understand as it is and HR's source is 100% sure a lot harder to understand. And I'm not talking about average programmers here. I'm talking about actual software engineers who would have a hard time reading it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 09, 2006 8:25 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2005 3:27 pm
Posts: 1072
Location: Stafford, England
Well as I've said, why raise hopes of making a public plan to let people down if we don't get the source code.

Richard is planning to email it to Iggly for a test compile when he can, and you can see this in the "Letter to Richard Langlois" post, so we would have easily had time to announce it and show people a form of plan.

I also say "official" but where are we at? Why it's HoverRace dot fucking com :P. Is my Alias on the forum "Ye Richard Langlois", no it isn't, so don't bother going on some 2 paragraph rant about my lack of adding HoverRace.com on the HoverRace.com forums, for the HoverRace.com website? Ok? Good.

I'll reitterate. The 'plan' of ours was never spoken of because of the fact we're missing one important ingrediant : The Sauce Code (haha ya get it :P).

Oh well this post probably made no sense, but its 4:08am geeez.

I can't promise everyone will get what they want, and right now just having 3 in the 'official' team is for the best right now, and if anyone has a problem with this, set your homepage to www.moveon.org.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 09, 2006 8:31 pm 
Offline
Source Developer
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2005 4:15 pm
Posts: 1242
Location: Atlanta, GA
Vigilante wrote:
Austin wrote:
There is a plan and there will only be one official version of course. We've drubbed up a mini team of coders, or rather Lars is going to work on the hr.com version (as he knows HoverRace inside out pretty much) with me and Iggly chipping in however which way we can.

Of course we'll most likely ask for your input on the matter of what to improve/add to the game, we've discussed the first issues that need to be sorted so I think we have some groundwork laid down.

The only thing is Vig, is why announce this plan? I mean, if Iggly does get the source code, then we'll go from there when the time arises, but theres no point saying anything now because we don't have the capability to do such.

I admire you for trying to get some organisation done though, cheers for that.


Thanks, but the issue here is still that this plan was hidden from everyone, and NOW that there will apparently be an official version? Who has the right to call any version an official version? I can see an official HoverRace.com version, but not an official version, unless Richard says:
Oh, well look-ee here, this Lars fellow sure seems to know what he's talking about, and doing with the game, and so I hereby dub his version the official version...

Which I don't think he would. You see, after GrokkSoft died, there was no official version anymore. There was only the Official HoverRace.com version, and other little versions that sometimes came up (such as Skelator's, and mine)... I'd like to see one Main/HoverRace.com version, but claiming that it will be the only official version isn't very fair...

I'm not sure what liscence Richard is going to release it under, but any liscence that would make it open-source... Well, let's say that if you said something like that to an open-source community, they'd be pretty pissed, seeing as how the people who are affiliated with HoverRace.com aren't the original designers/creators of HoverRace, now are they?

Oh... I forgot to answer your other question:
The reason I announced this plan before the source was released is because I think that, if the source were to be released, and there had not been a plan (I was not aware of your plan, which I still don't agree with because of that very reason), there would've been chaos.


This thread has exploded into a flamewar while you waited for the plan to be explained. Patience is a virtue.

No. There would not have been chaos. Fear not. The community has survived ten years now. It will continue.

There is an official version of HoverRace. It is the one the IMR recognizes. With the source, HoverRace will no longer be abandonware. It will be a free, open-source game. Think back to the Grokksoft days. Just different people in charge. It will be better. I am talking in short sentences to make my points very clear. So that you don't respond nitpicking every single sentence. Though you will anyway.

This plan is acceptable and it will work. You may bicker all you like, but you all must realize that as much as we try to make it a democracy, Austin still has the ultimate power. He owns this site.

Don't like it? Fork it. The end.

_________________
<www.igglybob.com>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 09, 2006 10:09 pm 
Austin wrote:
Well as I've said, why raise hopes of making a public plan to let people down if we don't get the source code.

Richard is planning to email it to Iggly for a test compile when he can, and you can see this in the "Letter to Richard Langlois" post, so we would have easily had time to announce it and show people a form of plan.

I also say "official" but where are we at? Why it's HoverRace dot fucking com :P. Is my Alias on the forum "Ye Richard Langlois", no it isn't, so don't bother going on some 2 paragraph rant about my lack of adding HoverRace.com on the HoverRace.com forums, for the HoverRace.com website? Ok? Good.

I'll reitterate. The 'plan' of ours was never spoken of because of the fact we're missing one important ingrediant : The Sauce Code (haha ya get it :P).

Oh well this post probably made no sense, but its 4:08am geeez.

I can't promise everyone will get what they want, and right now just having 3 in the 'official' team is for the best right now, and if anyone has a problem with this, set your homepage to www.moveon.org.


I'm not 100% sure exactly why you'd say that, but my main point is just that what I'm hearing doesn't sound like true open-source to me...

I guess my main issue is that Igglybob is making it out to be that HoverRace.com is the "official" HoverRace, and that, since you own HoverRace.com, you effectively "own" HoverRace...

I'm not even sure that you mean it that way, and in fact you seem to be less set on that sort of mindset than he is at this point...

I have a a hopeful feeling that I'm just misunderstanding Igglybob...

I know we had a long conversation where we both had no fucking clue what the other was really meaning...


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 09, 2006 10:18 pm 
Quote:
There will only be one official version of HoverRace that the IMR will recognize. I won't go into the details of how the security mechanism will work, for security via obscurity reasons, but any version that the IMR does not recognize will be treated as one of the cheat versions is treated now - the IMR will not let them race people who have the official version.


Quote:
This plan is acceptable and it will work. You may bicker all you like, but you all must realize that as much as we try to make it a democracy, Austin still has the ultimate power. He owns this site


Quote:
(00:13:42) naywhayare: We are the current leadership. Don't think that can't change.
(00:21:06) naywhayare: HoverRace.com is, for all intensive purposes, the official version of HoverRace.
(00:40:36) naywhayare: People in control of HoverRace = me, Austin, SF [tentatively].


I don't think this is nitpicking sentences, but I do think that all of these quotes deserve to stand by themselves as an example of my primary problems with the current, "plan," besides the obvious fact that the community was not involved, and was not even told of the plan when it was created, etc.

Also, the above Guest post was me.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 10, 2006 12:08 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 3:25 pm
Posts: 175
Location: Los Angeles, CA
No.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 10, 2006 12:20 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 548
Location: the Netherlands
I know a few other open-source games, they all work like this.

There are a few devs who work on the game and release updates. Others can submit changes too, which will be added by the devs if they approve of them. Only the devs can make the official builds. The system works well there, so why not here? :P

Vigilante wrote:

I don't think this is nitpicking sentences, but I do think that all of these quotes deserve to stand by themselves as an example of my primary problems with the current, "plan," besides the obvious fact that the community was not involved, and was not even told of the plan when it was created, etc.

Also, the above Guest post was me.

Well, I, for one, knew all that already. No idea how, but I did :P
I thought I read it on the forums, but whatever...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 10, 2006 12:24 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 3:25 pm
Posts: 175
Location: Los Angeles, CA
I was going to recommend something to what Zooz said. I think we should have a CVS repository.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 10, 2006 1:05 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 548
Location: the Netherlands
Yes, maybe HR should be put on SourceForge :P


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 10, 2006 5:37 am 
Offline
Source Developer
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2005 4:15 pm
Posts: 1242
Location: Atlanta, GA
Definitely a CVS repository, but Subversion is a cooler program to do that. We'll see.

_________________
<www.igglybob.com>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 10, 2006 7:50 am 
bapinney wrote:
I was going to recommend something to what Zooz said. I think we should have a CVS repository.


Holy shit! The first fully mature and well-intended arguement I think I've ever heard from BaPinney...

I won't agree or disagree with it, but I do know it works well for most other projects...

Zooz, my real issue with what you suggest in particular is that anyone besides SF, and maybe Igglybob could really be a developer... Austin, a developer on a C++ game?!

Also, Richard is the true developer of HoverRace, so either he, or the community should have input on who these developers would be.

No offense, but Austin being a developer is like me being a developer.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 10, 2006 8:30 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 548
Location: the Netherlands
Vigilante wrote:
Also, Richard is the true developer of HoverRace, so either he, or the community should have input on who these developers would be.

OK, then my input is SF, Iggly and Austin
Oh, and if Richard wants to join in I don't have a problem with that :P

Who knows, maybe Austin can learn C++... don't know how difficult it is
And, developer != coder, there are plenty of other things. Austin just knows a lot about HR I guess. And he knows php and mysql, which they talked about in the chat posted somewhere around here. So I don't see why not.

But Austin can probably defend himself better than me :P


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 57 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group