It would be nice, but why? The forum + github works pretty nicely and ease of installation isn’t a problem to the people here
Last thing I want to see is Urho3D wrapped with GPL, so no.
The downside of the forum is that you need to know what you’re looking for to find it, and the Urho3D group on GitHub limits itself to official/core components. I believe the ability to browse the produce of predecessors could further reduce redundancy in the community’s efforts and motivate collaborating on unofficial extensions by providing oversight.
I think maybe something like some sort of “Awesome Urho” page would be more in order…
@Lumak Why the irrational GPL hate, btw? It’s not like the license would be enforced on all content.
Here’s a section right out of wikipedia:
The GPL is a copyleft license, which means that derivative work must be open-source and distributed under the same or equivalent license terms. This is in distinction to permissive free software licenses, of which the BSD licenses and the MIT License are widely-used less-restrictive examples.
I have worked with one company where one engineer incorporated a use of GPL software in their product and years later ended up paying $15K per title because of it.
“Irrational Hate?” No, if you understand GPL, you’ll get to see that it is an expensive, “free software” that you can’t afford to use as indie developer.
Indeed it makes sense for the engine to be licensed as MIT, because the engine is used as part of projects. However, I do not see how a GPL license would be problematic for an add-on browser. Honestly it does seem irrational to me to discard efforts by fellow free software developers because a former colleague did not understand the terms of their preferred license (or was trying to get paid for another person’s work).
Urho3D is not a commercial enterprise, allowing us to use the nails that you stepped on in the past.
I think you nailed it! I really think that is the true agenda with GPL software: they want to get paid for their work.
I’d like to see Urho3D and its github maintained as free of any GPL software.
Now you’re twisting my words with paranoia.
LOL, you got me
Tired of having to delve thru countless license agreement like I were a lawyer. Have GPL today, have a plugin browser in 3 years, and have a legally monolithic piece of software with which you can’t do anything more.
GPL it’s a just an educational ok / delayed payment not-so-ok deal. Nothing wrong with that, it depends by the case. But why enforcing that on us by ourselves?
No GPL, no brainer.
Because of availability and fitting case.
it’s just an open ftp directory + some eye candy front-end. Why do we have to copy something not designed for us? I made a really simple website like this back in my days
You’re probably right, it just seemed like an opportunity to cut corners.