I really don't think licencing is the issue. For distros i can't see any of them refusing GPLv3 neither can't I understand why people are afraid of GPLv3. To me it's the same as for the mercurial switch, a bit of FUD and misunderstanding and also because it's new and the "old" one was still working.
I just think most of the Q3 engine developers are on their own project and have no time to backport/merge what is missing to get ET or RTCW work on the ioq3 engine (even if i think it would be very cool to play ET with a real client). And starting from scratch would be a lot of work and a want to waste time to get what was already done with ioq3. On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 7:30 PM, <m...@rq3.com> wrote: > I think the stuff that has put people off: > > ET/RtCW - released under GPLv3, ioq3 released under GPLv2 > Some people have philosophical issues with GPLv3 and I guess some distros > do too. > > ET/RtCW - not all that interesting, tech-wise > Some kind of skeletal animation format, has campaigns and class-based > play, has some foliage tech, and... scripted actions on maps? RtCW's Mac > port had totally broken support for QVMs and mods in general, can't > remember what ET's support was in that regard. > > ET/RtCW - on Mercurial, isn't it? > Change is scary! > > I believe that most people are interested in merely porting ET/RtCW tech > back to the ioq3 branch because, honestly, all the hard work was done for > supporting multiple platforms, bugfixing, exploit fixing, and using more > modern build tools and portable backends like SDL. This ain't no Doom > 3/Quake 4/ET:QW release with dynamic lights and megatexture and stuff like > that. It's more like a baby incremental update to the Q3 engine. > > I don't think anyone wants to convert ioq3 to GPLv3 just to add some > ET/RtCW tech. And it's a bunch of work to port all the ioq3 updates to > the ET/RtCW codebase and then you'd still be maintaining two codebases, > one GPLv2 and one GPLv3 so you don't alienate people one way or the other. > Plus, the change of the version control system probably isn't helping. > > That's the general feeling I get from it. Now if the stuff was licensed > under GPLv2 I think you'd see people already making patches for ioq3 ala > Thilo's ioElite Forces. Maybe I'm wrong, but that's how I see it. > > Monk. > > > Am Samstag, den 06.11.2010, 08:25 +0200 schrieb Michael Menegakis: > >> On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 5:38 AM, Egg Dog <egg...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > Has there been any additional work done on these releases yet? > >> > I have noticed the mercurial repositories have not had any commits > >> aside > >> > from the initial release in August. > >> > I'm trying to wolfet on my lovely 64bit lunux system and not having a > >> whole > >> > lot of joy. > > > > there is http://xreal-project.net/ > > > > Tr3B is porting the xreal renderer to et:wolf > > > > _______________________________________________ > > ioquake3 mailing list > > ioquake3@lists.ioquake.org > > http://lists.ioquake.org/listinfo.cgi/ioquake3-ioquake.org > > By sending this message I agree to love ioquake3 and libsdl. > > > > _______________________________________________ > ioquake3 mailing list > ioquake3@lists.ioquake.org > http://lists.ioquake.org/listinfo.cgi/ioquake3-ioquake.org > By sending this message I agree to love ioquake3 and libsdl. >
_______________________________________________ ioquake3 mailing list ioquake3@lists.ioquake.org http://lists.ioquake.org/listinfo.cgi/ioquake3-ioquake.org By sending this message I agree to love ioquake3 and libsdl.
