What's new
By:
  • Visit Rebornbuddy
  • Visit Panda Profiles
  • Visit LLamamMagic
  • Visit Resources
  • Visit Downloads
  • Visit Portal

Developer Rules Update

As the mods say why not leave it a month guys all this 'well its mine mine mine because i wrote it' just seems childish. I apreciate all the work that the comunity puts in some more then others yes however if you didnt want to show off ur work you wouldnt have posted it in the first place. Yes i like others disagree with it however HB has ALWAYS done right by us in the past and are continueing to do so. They are fighting in court for us to continue to use their product they couldve high tailed it out of here like pirox but they didnt. They are standing and fighting and i will stand beside them. Alot of these negative posters sound ALOT like blizzard themselves, 'WE MADE, IT ITS OURS AND WE DONT WANT PEOPLE TO TOUCH IT FOR ANY REASON BE IT TO IMPROVE MODIFY ETC". Plain as day we are a comunity most contribute in 1 way or another. As in the words of us aussies "IF YOU DONT LOVE IT, LEAVE IT!!" yeah im looking at u kiwis!

Cheers
Incog
 
I think people should be allowed to change the code for personal use. If they want to change the code for everyone else they should PM the original developer with the code snippet for them to test and hopefully approve into THEIR code.

As for ccs that are not being updated anymore have a mod patrol those threads or when ever a community member pms a mod that certain cc has not been worked on in ages, then and ONLY then should they update that thread with an "Able to be edited" sign in the title or original post. Do not let people steal code(basically what this is) without permission.

I honestly think this is a absolutely terrible rule change. You are already having very good coders leave because of it.

I would much rather have a few amazing coders over a thousand derps who change one line and never support the project again.
 
Last edited:
Either ppl were not around at Glider times, or they've forgotten. As hawker stated, it was like this back in Glider times and it was working great imo. Seems like you all think someone will repost your CC with one line changed - but I don't believe that's going to happen. If they only change 1 line it's not worth making a thread about it. And if your change is so minor and really DOES improve the CC, I'm sure if the main dev is being notified about it he will gladly make the change to the main CC. And even IF someone does post a thread with 1 line changed and he gives rep as it's required of him - his thread will doubtfully live very long since it's frowned upon to repost something with such a small change. I haven't found a single guy in this thread who liked the idea of someone reposting a 1-line change, so if someone tried to do it, I do believe people would frown upon that thread/person, and it's very doubtful the thread would be active for more than a few days - so what's the problem in that? If the new "modified" CC isn't being maintained and updated, it will go to archives and will be gone. Although if the thread does get popular, you can only assume it's because it's really good, and is being maintained and updated. In this case, we'll just have another great CC on the forums?

Personally, I like this change. If I post something on forums and someone else is able to improve it - I'm glad to see offsprings. I mean, what's not to like in an improved version of my work?
 
Last edited:
Inrego said:
Either ppl were not around at Glider times, or they've forgotten. As hawker stated, it was like this back in Glider times and it was working great imo. Seems like you all think someone will repost your CC with one line changed - but I don't believe that's going to happen. If they only change 1 line it's not worth making a thread about it. And if your change is so minor and really DOES improve the CC, I'm sure if the main dev is being notified about it he will gladly make the change to the main CC. And even IF someone does post a thread with 1 line changed and he gives rep as it's required of him - his thread will doubtfully live very long since it's frowned upon to repost something with such a small change. I haven't found a single guy in this thread who liked the idea of someone reposting a 1-line change, so if someone tried to do it, I do believe people would frown upon that thread/person, and it's very doubtful the thread would be active for more than a few days - so what's the problem in that? If the new "modified" CC isn't being maintained and updated, it will go to archives and will be gone. Although if the thread does get popular, you can only assume it's because it's really good, and is being maintained and updated. In this case, we'll just have another great CC on the forums?

Personally, I like this change. If I post something on forums and someone else is able to improve it - I'm glad to see offsprings. I mean, what's not to like in an improved version of my work?
Click to expand...
even before we sat down and wrote the developer rules, its not like we had people stealing projects, at most we had one guy who didnt know better go (heres my edit of so and so's CC because i was doing this very specifc thing and i needed it). and then it would fade into obscurity. its not like 1000 people are going to copy your project and run with it.

remember imitation is the greatest forum of flattery.
 
I'm trying to understand why this would be a good idea, but here's what i've come up with and i would like an answer to it

* The developer rules were changes, with no prior warning (How is that fair)
* Custom Classes made under the old rule, is affected (with no choice for the developers to take the CCs down and have them deemed "Not allowed to be ripped". That's kind of respectless)
* The developers were not asked to give their concent about these changes (seems pretty standard with a changed end-user agreement when something changes)
- From what i can see BSD licenses require a clause, but since there is no user agreement to this, how can it be valid to do this?
*The developers not sharing their code on the HB forums, but through a SVN are somehow under the BSD license as well? (even though you can't come and say that it's due to a rule for the forums - they're not on the forums)



What worries me:
* That you find it a great idea to have people use other peoples work to make something they themselves are happy with, then the original developer will add that piece of code into his CC - rendering the new CC useless.
* You're saying that this change was mostly to make sure OLD CCs can be revived. What was wrong with the old rule for that?
* Big developers might stop handling their CCs (not saying i fall into this categori, but it kinda sucks to be maintaining so many CCs for nothing)
 
Venus112 said:
* The developer rules were changes, with no prior warning (How is that fair)
Click to expand...
Does the government ask you whether it's okay to change a law? Does the caretaker of a road ask you whether it's okay to change the maximum speed on that road?
*The developers not sharing their code on the HB forums, but through a SVN are somehow under the BSD license as well? (even though you can't come and say that it's due to a rule for the forums - they're not on the forums)
Click to expand...
As soon as you put your SVN in a link in a post on this forum, it is on this forum.
* That you find it a great idea to have people use other peoples work to make something they themselves are happy with, then the original developer will add that piece of code into his CC - rendering the new CC useless.
Click to expand...
This isn't the only thing that might happen. If I found a very good CC that simply doesn't support what I'm trying to do (for example; there are a couple of Raid-only CCs in here that I might want to use as a leveling CC) then I can take that CC, give credit where credit's due, and add movement logic. We call this a Branch. The original CC writer will probably not support this since he doesn't need it. The original CC will still exist (since the movement logic; even when disabled; may hamper raid perfomance) but my new CC will be useful all on it's own.
* You're saying that this change was mostly to make sure OLD CCs can be revived. What was wrong with the old rule for that?
Click to expand...
The fact that it lays undue stress on the moderators/administrators.
* Big developers might stop handling their CCs (not saying i fall into this categori, but it kinda sucks to be maintaining so many CCs for nothing)
Click to expand...
Why would they? Nothing changes for them except that their code will live on even longer since it can be branched into something else useful. They're not maintaining CCs for nothing, they're still maintaining whatever it was they were maintaining for whatever reason they had in the first place.

I really, truly, don't see how a developer can lose out in the new environment. They don't lose their code, they don't lose their userbase. They do gain potential good ideas from other developers, they do gain fame when another developer gives them credit. I don't see how anyone will be losing anything, I do see how everyone will be gaining a lot because of new developers finding a much lower threshold to start developing and experienced developers finding it much easier to revive not-so-long-dead projects.
 
Venus112 said:
I'm trying to understand why this would be a good idea, but here's what i've come up with and i would like an answer to it

* The developer rules were changes, with no prior warning (How is that fair)
* Custom Classes made under the old rule, is affected (with no choice for the developers to take the CCs down and have them deemed "Not allowed to be ripped". That's kind of respectless)
* The developers were not asked to give their concent about these changes (seems pretty standard with a changed end-user agreement when something changes)
- From what i can see BSD licenses require a clause, but since there is no user agreement to this, how can it be valid to do this?
*The developers not sharing their code on the HB forums, but through a SVN are somehow under the BSD license as well? (even though you can't come and say that it's due to a rule for the forums - they're not on the forums)



What worries me:
* That you find it a great idea to have people use other peoples work to make something they themselves are happy with, then the original developer will add that piece of code into his CC - rendering the new CC useless.
* You're saying that this change was mostly to make sure OLD CCs can be revived. What was wrong with the old rule for that?
* Big developers might stop handling their CCs (not saying i fall into this categori, but it kinda sucks to be maintaining so many CCs for nothing)
Click to expand...

Developer rules were changed because developers were PMing us too many "he stole my code" complaints.
Existing devs who object to the rules can withdraw their projects or release them elsewhere. If they release elsewhere, they can police copyright themselves. We do not want to be asked to police people's projects or to make judgements as to who "stole" how much code.
If someone's work is only available on SVN, its outside our rules anyway and again we cannot be asked to police it.

Its worth pointing out that most of us have been doing this for free for years and if Glider had not been closed down,we would still be doing ccs and plugins for free for Glider. Development is a form of art - you can code something beautiful. Releasing the code for others to use and mess about with gives you a community of testers and you get code suggestions that often take your work way further than sitting at a screen alone could ever do. We enjoy it. However, dealing with potty mouth kids who argue over who stole code is not fun. We don't enjoy it and we won't pay people to do it. At a personal level, I was shocked to read the word "steal" in the developer section rules. If a new developer wants to start by messing about with an existing cc, it hurts no-one and its certainly is not stealing.

To sum up, open source releases have always work well and our mistake was to have a rule that moved away from that norm. The old system ceased to work due to abuse by devs who spent more time PMing us about stolen code than developing. If in 4 weeks, you have people spamming ccs with full credit to you and only 1 line and a name change, please remind me that I got this wrong. I doubt it will happen :)
 
I think in the base issue lies with the abruptness of the rule change. (I mean the issue that surprised us the most)

I'm no king among coders, but I don't want my work shredded to all hell. I see both sides and agree with both sides to a certain extent. If your base questions is "Have the admins made the 'Right' decision?"

we'll have to wait and see...
 
Due to these rules, we (the people behind LazyRaider - all in one PvE CCs), have decided to take a step back from all developing CCs
I personally encourage other developers to do the same, however i am in no way forcing anyone
 
Last edited:
Venus112 said:
Due to these rules, we (the people behind LazyRaider - all in one PvE CCs), have decided to take a step back from all developing CCs
I personally encourage other developers to do the same, however i am in no way forcing anyone
Click to expand...

Do you want me to archive your thread ?

EDIT: since your SVN is down I've archived the thread.
 
Hawker said:
Do you think that Linux Torvalds gets some written assurance that no-one will rip off Linux and make a new OS called Hinux just by changing one line of code? No - he has the assurance that his reputation is such that people will prefer to use his Linix and stupid forks will crash and burn.

You have the same assurance. People do like what you do - if you are around to maintain it, no-one else will be able to get a reputation that you have and your users will stick with you. I've been doing free cc development since 2007. 4 of the top 20 Glider ccs were mine. All were copied - only one fork proved worthwhile and the rest faded into obscurity. You really do not need to be concerned about this...wait a few weeks and you will see what I mean.
Click to expand...

I can see both sides of the coin, I really can. And, I also agree with both sides on certain points. However, what Hawker is saying is true, at least for me. I will always stick with the original developer's work if they support it as they stated they would, and the offspring forks that pop up wouldn't really even concern me. I don't like change very much, and I like to stick with originals, because they work the best.

I've already seen several people temporarily shutting down their work due to these rule changes, and right at a critical moment as MoP is on the horizon. All these CCs that are being taken down work really well, because they're constantly being worked on, fixed, modified, and improved by the original authors. I, for one, am using several of the ones being halted. It's going to make things tough on me because I now have to search for yet another CC that works as well as the halted one, and there aren't that many, if any, that do.

I'm not trying to sway one side or another to accept or change the rules that have been changed. I'm just trying to put into light the consumer (user's) point-of-view. I don't have the knowledge to copy/paste/edit anything, nor do I want to, because as I've stated before, I like the original. It works, and often times works well. I always post suggestions to help improve the original to the authors' threads, and await the modifications made.

Honestly, I just hope that these troubled waters settle very soon and things will be reopened back to the way they used to be. I'm going to hate not being able to play some of my toons efficiently anymore because the good, active developers went on hiatus due to rule changes. I'm sorry if I rubbed anyone the wrong way and angered you, annoyed you, or cause some sort of negative vibe. I just want my HB community back to normal, releasing awesome work as usual, and we all live an play happily together until Blizzard destroys everything.
 
Venus112 said:
Due to these rules, we (the people behind LazyRaider - all in one PvE CCs), have decided to take a step back from all developing CCs
Click to expand...



That's fine, don't need to post this over and over. Do what they originally said and PM a Moderator and have your thread archived.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Zoinx said:
That's fine, don't need to post this over and over. Do what they originally said and PM a Moderator and have your thread archived.
Click to expand...

Patience young padowan
Our users deserve to know
 
@ Everyone - If you want your thread(s) archived, PM the links to Tony and he'll archive them.

The rules were changed and that's how it's going to be. Right now you're arguing to a wall.

A word of advice:
Keep your projects open and see what happens. This change was mainly made due to devs being MIA for long periods of time.

It should not affect 95% of the user base
 
This is such bullshit I hope the other coders are willing to pick up there projects then because we are losing valuable plugins/profiles because of this I don't want to lose lazyraider or anything else for that matter
 
I'm wondering what bobby is going to do :D
Since he stated clear in his CC/Botbase that no one actually should post modified versions of his beautiful mind output.

Curious, curious...

greetz

Weischbier

Edit: Just for understanding. I'm trolling here a lil' bit. Of course no one would ever get heir hands on bobbys work!
Most of the things in his CC is not even understandable to the "common" CC dev. At least not when your not a professional programmer.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
weischbier said:
I'm wondering what bobby is going to do :D
Since he stated clear in his CC/Botbase that no one actually should post modified versions of his beautiful mind output.

Curious, curious...

greetz

Weischbier
Click to expand...
Have you ever used ShamWoW? It is near PERFECT. A farcry to all the other CC's on this forum.

Now, have you ever reported an issue to Bobby about ShamWoW? Again, he answers everyone and corrects the problem (which doesn't happen often because there are no problems)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top