GPL violation??

[Ty]

I guess this question is for dan.<br>Has the source for this port been released??<br>from what i have read in this forum pocketquake<br>was modified code from the quake source from id software.  they released the source under GPL so any modification should be released under the GPL as well, correct??<br><br>As i notice not alot of coders are on this forum check out http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/ and http://www.idsoftware.com/archives/sourcearc.html<br><br>i tiink it is important to respect the GPL as it is a very important part of free, open software.<br><br>thanks,<br><br>TY

[Dan East]

Please take the time to read the other posts to find out the answer to this question.<br><br>Dan East

[Mark Rejhon]

Hello,<br><br>Yep, Dan needs to clean up the code and finish the fixed-point-math speedups, and then he'll release the source code in an upcoming release!  He is also waiting from iD software Inc. regarding a couple of questions, including compiling the registered version.<br><br>(Dan, you may recall my innocent curious inquiry about source code on Brighthand caused a firestorm from some people.  I apologize if that caused you any inconveniences from other people!   Just in case you didn't get my earlier, bigger message, which was on this board before it got deleted before the web hosting move.)

[Ty]

i was not trying to cause any problems either.<br>but my point was one of the strengths of the GPL is that binaries and source are released at the same time.  i do lots of coding and i understand the importance of cleaning up your code and making it somewhat readable but the intention of the GPL is not to release binaries and then say the source is coming.  alot of ppl do this i know but it i still not right.  i commend dan for releasing the source (when he does) b/c i am sure quake on the ipaq is not on the FSF or RMS's hit list for violations of the GPL.  <br>So basically my point is i love the GPL b/c it makes things like this port possible and we should all work very hard to keep it strong.<br><br>later,<br><br>Ty

[999]

Ty:<br><br>I've heard that id has visited the site, rumor has it, even John Carmack.<br><br>I think they would be the first to scream "violator!" if anything were really wrong here.  <br><br>I guess like you pointed out, since this is a relatively small market/scene, I don't reckon there's not much fuss over sticking exactly to the GPL honor code.<br><br>As posted in other threads, and pointed out my Mark, the code is on the way.  I only wish I could program so I could see Dan's work first hand.  I always picture the source for these emulators to look and work rather beautifully, like a piece of Art, provided you can speak the lingo.  <br><br>IMHO, I think witholding the source has hindered the release of another Quake port which was brought to light a week or so ago.  <br><br>I could be wrong, but in any case, much respect to Dan for Being First with his Quake release.<br><br>

[Mark Rejhon]

Hi,<br><br>I know about the other Quake for PocketPC port.  How much do you know about it, out of curiousity?

[Dan East]

Are you talking to me?  :) Nothing at all. If you're talking about the college students, I went to the website once after the first release of Pocket Quake, just to see what they had to say.  All I saw was a point for downloading their source, so I went no further.<br><br>Dan East

[Mark Rejhon]

Nope.<br><br>The other one is a real, working, complete one, by a well-known PocketPC entity that has released various stuff before for the PocketPC.  For various reasons, they decided not to release it.   <br><br>I actually know them; but they requested to keep the whole thing a secret, as they decided not to release it.   I wish I could say more, but I have to respect their wishes.

[Mike]

Any idea why they decided not to release it?<br><br> -Mike http://www.pocketgamer.org

[killzat - Mark]

Well I can tell you it's not mine =), stopped working on Quake a long time ago, although we did get it working.<br><br>Decided to pursue our PocketPC research, which I'm not allowed to reveal just yet. Might try implementing code similar to what Dan is doing, just for the hell of it - see what happens etc. <br><br>The tests we’ve done on similar routines don’t really give you a true perspective, so I’ll wait to see what Dans new code does. If it works then this could actually push the technology we’re developing into the public a lot faster.