Bradley Arsenault wrote:
> I don't see what your talking about. We've never had to distribute the
> source code to the YOG server, we could have kept it 100% private and
> refused to give copies to people at request, in any GPL version, as long
> as we didn't send out server binaries to other people. GPL v3 doesn't
> affect us in this matter.
You are maybe right. Anyways this does not affect us as we will have yog in
every client, too.
In my opinion actually doing it the described way should be forbidden. how would
you know you are actually allowed to close the source of yog as it has
contributions of many others, too.
I don't want to contribute to a game, that basic functionality, the net game can
become an expensive closed source add on. That's why I mentioned a license that
also keeps server parts open.
Greetings, Leo Wandersleb
For our discretion, all the existing code is already open and that can't be changed. If someone where to write a clone server, and host it themselves, they would not be required to give us any source code, its just his/her private work, no matter what "license" they put it under, until they give copies to other people, that license doesn't kick in.
The whole of the project is considered to be under "GPL version 2 or later", so we can distribute subsequent versions, such as Alpha 24, under "GPL version 3 or later", and If I have any control, this is exactly whats going to happen. We could even re-distribute older versions of the code in the new liscense, but I consider this unnecessary. Our project isn't particularly at threat for the things GPL 3 protects against, so back-porting changes isn't necessary.
Also. when I do the change, I'm going to make our licensing more clear, including adding a pre-amble to the tops of our translation files and any other text files in the project, and I will be more clear about the liscense on our images, more like a governing pre-amble file.