EVE Search - Open Source EVE

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Open Source EVE

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Jason Edwards Internet Tough Guy	Posted - 2009.08.03 21:22:00 - [1] Now we all know that the source is quite available for eve. :) I'm quite sure that I read a dev say that you can basically decompile the client and get the source. Regardless; the point I'm making... any perceived threat of making the source code open has already failed. So realistically. What are the disadvantages for CCP to go open source and build in the typical sort of "launchpad" or trac way... in order to basically create the open source method of submitting bugs and having the community work with the CCP maintainers to build the better eve client. The advantages are very clear and easy to see. What are some of the disadvantages of going this way?: 1. Extra bandwidth. Many people are more likely to still download the binaries; AND get the source and compile/build as they go. 2. Possible extra work for programmers of needing to sift through bug reports and debugging information. Etcetc. 3. Working client so programmers get fired because the bugs get fixeD? 4. ??? 5. Profit? Clearly the advantages far outweigh those few disadvantages. Perhaps there are some disadvantages i dont see? ------------------------ To make a megathron from scratch, you must first invent the eve universe. ------------------------ Life sucks and then you get podded.
Kuar Z'thain Fraser's Finest Minor Threat.	Posted - 2009.08.03 21:27:00 - [2] You would have to keep the Server/Client communications closed source or you're gonna have a **-ton of uncatchable macros running around. Not to mention giving nefarious FCs the ability to call targets before** landing on grid. I could go on, but I wont. This is stupid.
Khemul Zula Amarr Keisen Trade League	Posted - 2009.08.03 21:28:00 - [3] Not sure where to start... "In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded."
Yarinor	Posted - 2009.08.03 21:30:00 - [4] Originally by: Kuar Z'thain You would have to keep the Server/Client communications closed source or you're gonna have a **-ton of uncatchable macros running around. Not to mention giving nefarious FCs the ability to call targets before landing on grid. I could go on, but I wont. This is stupid. That depends, games for the original xbox had to be signed on compilation to be able to run (kinda like TiVo did with the unix kernal those ing **ers), you could make the server only allow connections from clients which were signed during the build process as well.
Jason Edwards Internet Tough Guy	Posted - 2009.08.03 21:32:00 - [5] Originally by: Kuar Z'thain You would have to keep the Server/Client communications closed source or you're gonna have a **-ton of uncatchable macros running around. Not to mention giving nefarious FCs the ability to call targets before** landing on grid. I could go on, but I wont. This is stupid. The source code is already available bro. So any of this is already not valid. The question is to make it possible for people to submit patches to the maintainers basically. ------------------------ To make a megathron from scratch, you must first invent the eve universe. ------------------------ Life sucks and then you get podded.
Kuar Z'thain Fraser's Finest Minor Threat.	Posted - 2009.08.03 21:36:00 - [6] Originally by: Jason Edwards Originally by: Kuar Z'thain You would have to keep the Server/Client communications closed source or you're gonna have a **-ton of uncatchable macros running around. Not to mention giving nefarious FCs the ability to call targets before** landing on grid. I could go on, but I wont. This is stupid. The source code is already available bro. So any of this is already not valid. The question is to make it possible for people to submit patches to the maintainers basically. You mean that old code they frantically had to rework the communications stack to prevent exploits from? Yeah. We're talking about current code, brosef. You want to contribute to the game? CCP does hire every so often. Opening this up to the public will cause much more woe than good.
Venko Trenulo Spelunkers	Posted - 2009.08.03 21:39:00 - [7] The advantages such as expecting altruistic alliances to submit completed, debugged and regression-tested UI bugfixes to CCP for the general good seem to me far outweighed by the pain of having CCP be responsible for figuring out where the bugs are coming from. Select your client version from the pull-down menu: [ ] Bog-standard CCP client [ ] Jihadswarm anti-Hulk client [ ] Hauling mission client [ ] Gallente [ ] Caldari [ ]Amarr [ ] Minmatar [ ] Other (specify) A more likely scenario than your Altruistic Programmer model is... AIMBOT!
Khemul Zula Amarr Keisen Trade League	Posted - 2009.08.03 21:42:00 - [8] Originally by: Jason Edwards Originally by: Kuar Z'thain You would have to keep the Server/Client communications closed source or you're gonna have a **-ton of uncatchable macros running around. Not to mention giving nefarious FCs the ability to call targets before** landing on grid. I could go on, but I wont. This is stupid. The source code is already available bro. So any of this is already not valid. The question is to make it possible for people to submit patches to the maintainers basically. I think you are looking at this too much from a software standpoint. Look at it from a legal & copyright standpoint. Pretty sure the CCP legal department is currently bribing the forum mods to quietly eliminate this thread and erase all knowledge of this idea. "In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded."
Kuar Z'thain Fraser's Finest Minor Threat.	Posted - 2009.08.03 21:43:00 - [9] Edited by: Kuar Z''thain on 03/08/2009 21:46:47 Originally by: Venko Trenulo The advantages such as expecting altruistic alliances to submit completed, debugged and regression-tested UI bugfixes to CCP for the general good seem to me far outweighed by the pain of having CCP be responsible for figuring out where the bugs are coming from. Select your client version from the pull-down menu: [ ] Bog-standard CCP client [ ] Jihadswarm anti-Hulk client [ ] Hauling mission client [ ] Gallente [ ] Caldari [ ]Amarr [ ] Minmatar [ ] Other (specify) A more likely scenario than your Altruistic Programmer model is... AIMBOT! With the Eve-Equivalent being the Kill A->Z Script. Or maybe the 'Shoot what the FC is shooting' script. That would be a good one. Then all the FCs can just sit back and play the RTS that they want Eve to be. edit: Khemul From either perspective, this idea is death to a company that relies on a single-sharded server for profit.
Jason Edwards Internet Tough Guy	Posted - 2009.08.03 21:54:00 - [10] Originally by: Khemul Zula Originally by: Jason Edwards Originally by: Kuar Z'thain You would have to keep the Server/Client communications closed source or you're gonna have a **-ton of uncatchable macros running around. Not to mention giving nefarious FCs the ability to call targets before** landing on grid. I could go on, but I wont. This is stupid. The source code is already available bro. So any of this is already not valid. The question is to make it possible for people to submit patches to the maintainers basically. I think you are looking at this too much from a software standpoint. Look at it from a legal & copyright standpoint. Pretty sure the CCP legal department is currently bribing the forum mods to quietly eliminate this thread and erase all knowledge of this idea. Ok fair enough. The assertion that perhaps rogue eve online servers get reverse engineered and built. Still such things can be done now anyway. So again. Still not a big issue. As for copyright. Realistically... anyone can download the game client now and install it. They like distribution of it. ------------------------ To make a megathron from scratch, you must first invent the eve universe. ------------------------ Life sucks and then you get podded.
Kuar Z'thain Fraser's Finest Minor Threat.	Posted - 2009.08.03 21:59:00 - [11] Originally by: Jason Edwards Originally by: Khemul Zula Originally by: Jason Edwards Originally by: Kuar Z'thain You would have to keep the Server/Client communications closed source or you're gonna have a **-ton of uncatchable macros running around. Not to mention giving nefarious FCs the ability to call targets before** landing on grid. I could go on, but I wont. This is stupid. The source code is already available bro. So any of this is already not valid. The question is to make it possible for people to submit patches to the maintainers basically. I think you are looking at this too much from a software standpoint. Look at it from a legal & copyright standpoint. Pretty sure the CCP legal department is currently bribing the forum mods to quietly eliminate this thread and erase all knowledge of this idea. Ok fair enough. The assertion that perhaps rogue eve online servers get reverse engineered and built. Still such things can be done now anyway. So again. Still not a big issue. As for copyright. Realistically... anyone can download the game client now and install it. They like distribution of it. Again, you're oversimplifying. If there are currently 'rogue servers' out there right now, they are running on Revelations II code. You're asking that they get shiny new updates to reverse-engineer every time Eve updates. So if we do get past all the issues currently presented, you like open source so much, which licensing model do you suggest? If you can't answer this with a what and why then you really need to stfu.
Khemul Zula Amarr Keisen Trade League	Posted - 2009.08.03 22:16:00 - [12] Originally by: Jason Edwards Originally by: Khemul Zula Originally by: Jason Edwards Originally by: Kuar Z'thain You would have to keep the Server/Client communications closed source or you're gonna have a **-ton of uncatchable macros running around. Not to mention giving nefarious FCs the ability to call targets before** landing on grid. I could go on, but I wont. This is stupid. The source code is already available bro. So any of this is already not valid. The question is to make it possible for people to submit patches to the maintainers basically. I think you are looking at this too much from a software standpoint. Look at it from a legal & copyright standpoint. Pretty sure the CCP legal department is currently bribing the forum mods to quietly eliminate this thread and erase all knowledge of this idea. Ok fair enough. The assertion that perhaps rogue eve online servers get reverse engineered and built. Still such things can be done now anyway. So again. Still not a big issue. As for copyright. Realistically... anyone can download the game client now and install it. They like distribution of it. Seriously. Look at it from a legal & copyright angle. Right now CCP owns the code. They can try to shutdown people running rogue servers. They can try to shutdown people copying their work. They can try to go after people who edit the game code without permission. Going open source and saying "here play with this all you want" sort of destroys all of that. Giving anyone who wants to run an EVE server the legal rights too is probably not something CCP wants to do. "In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded."
Gunnanmon Gallente UNITED STAR SYNDICATE	Posted - 2009.08.03 22:26:00 - [13] That ...??? ... Profit thing never gets old. Signature locked for discussing moderation. Navigator
Jason Edwards Internet Tough Guy	Posted - 2009.08.03 22:41:00 - [14] Originally by: Kuar Z'thain Again, you're oversimplifying. If there are currently 'rogue servers' out there right now, they are running on Revelations II code. You're asking that they get shiny new updates to reverse-engineer every time Eve updates. Again, you're trolling. As I said in the first post. You can decompile python; afaik. I use the ccp dev who said it. Or how about someone saying the same thing... who is in your alliance. There is no "old revelations code" or anything. They can decompile each patch. Quote: So if we do get past all the issues currently presented, you like open source so much, which licensing model do you suggest? If you can't answer this with a what and why then you really need to stfu. The sky is the limit here. They can even write their own. ------------------------ To make a megathron from scratch, you must first invent the eve universe. ------------------------ Life sucks and then you get podded.
LuCiD Amarr CrayC Inc.	Posted - 2009.08.03 22:46:00 - [15] After reading this thread, one question remains in my mind: Why? I see no valid point in making it open source, despite Jason saying "The advantages are very clear and easy to see".
Jason Edwards Internet Tough Guy	Posted - 2009.08.03 22:58:00 - [16] Originally by: Khemul Zula Seriously. Look at it from a legal & copyright angle. Right now CCP owns the code. They can try to shutdown people running rogue servers. They can try to shutdown people copying their work. They can try to go after people who edit the game code without permission. Going open source and saying "here play with this all you want" sort of destroys all of that. Giving anyone who wants to run an EVE server the legal rights too is probably not something CCP wants to do. If they want this. They can write their copyright license to that effect. Or find one that works for them. The reality is that their software is patented by default. They have to expressly give freedom away. Which is the purpose of GPL is forced maximum freedom. Open source only means that the source is freely available. Lets just look at Creative Commons for example. You can get it such that there may not be any derivative works produced; and no commercial allowance. (by-nc-nd) That pretty much ends any rogue servers legally. Practically speaking... being open source and using the open source tools like launchpad/trac or whatever. Doesnt mean they have given away any new freedoms. Personally I see no reason to fear rogue servers and thusly going GPL would be no issue at all. ------------------------ To make a megathron from scratch, you must first invent the eve universe. ------------------------ Life sucks and then you get podded.
Blane Xero Amarr The Firestorm Cartel	Posted - 2009.08.03 23:02:00 - [17] There are no "Rogue Servers" for eve. Lets just get that clear. The source code that was leaked was client code. It was all completely useless code, decompiling the client will never give you the code to "run a rogue server" since the client does very little if any legwork other than showing giving you a UI and graphics. Making the client open source would be, not only a waste of time, but it would be astoundingly stupid. Since that can be used for more bad things than good that target legitimate players. _____________________________________ Haruhiist since December 2008 Originally by: CCP Fallout :facepalm:
wickedpheonix Guy Fawkes Trust Fund	Posted - 2009.08.03 23:10:00 - [18] Originally by: Kuar Z'thain You would have to keep the Server/Client communications closed source or you're gonna have a **-ton of uncatchable macros running around. Not to mention giving nefarious FCs the ability to call targets before** landing on grid. I could go on, but I wont. This is stupid. Don't forget the simple stuff like private servers. You're going to have quite a few people take off to play on a new server where everyone is Level 5, all items are free, Concord doesn't exist in high-sec, no delay while Jump Cloning, hell no standing requirements for Jump Clones, etc. etc... and then you realize that you already have the gist of much of that on Singularity. There's a reason why people spend their time on Tranquility and not on Singularity and that is because Tranq PVP is much higher quality because of a) more people (for all segments of PVP: from market PVP to large-scale alliance battles) and b) real risk. So what does this mean from a business perspective for CCP? Prospective customers will go, hey I can either get a trial for the full game, pay a monthly fee, and (if I like the trial) go on to spend forever skilling my character up, or I can play on this private server, for free, with a fully developed character. For the newbie who doesn't know anything about EVE, which one do you think they're going to choose??? However, if they took the trial for Tranq (as they're forced to now), they can see what EVE is all about and then subscribe and have fun.
Discrodia Gallente Guardian Legion SCUM.	Posted - 2009.08.03 23:11:00 - [19] But sir, wouldn't putting the quantum harmonizer charges in the photonic resonation chamber result in a fatal breakdown of the particle flux matrix? ___________________________________________ MUFFINS :D
Blane Xero Amarr The Firestorm Cartel	Posted - 2009.08.03 23:21:00 - [20] Originally by: Discrodia But sir, wouldn't putting the quantum harmonizer charges in the photonic resonation chamber result in a fatal breakdown of the particle flux matrix? +1 for the reference. _____________________________________ Haruhiist since December 2008 Originally by: CCP Fallout :facepalm:
Kuar Z'thain Fraser's Finest Minor Threat.	Posted - 2009.08.04 01:35:00 - [21] Jason, I think we both have some misconceptions here. Do you only want the Client open for ****ing around with? If this is so then I honestly have no problem people contributing to a CCP-reviewed code base. You still have issues with people seeing behind the UI but this really does nothing that a standard macroer can't accomplish with over-the-counter software. My issue is when you say "Make Eve open source" that means Eve. All of it. Server and Client side. As it has been pointed out, this is a very bad idea.
Daquaris Dreams of Desolation Systematic-Chaos	Posted - 2009.08.04 01:40:00 - [22] Originally by: wickedpheonix Don't forget the simple stuff like private servers. You're going to have quite a few people take off to play on a new server where everyone is Level 5, all items are free, Concord doesn't exist in high-sec, no delay while Jump Cloning, hell no standing requirements for Jump Clones, etc. etc... and then you realize that you already have the gist of much of that on Singularity. There's a reason why people spend their time on Tranquility and not on Singularity and that is because Tranq PVP is much higher quality because of a) more people (for all segments of PVP: from market PVP to large-scale alliance battles) and b) real risk. You know, there are already not just one, but at least TWO working open source alternative eve server projects, right? Google it, you'll find them. Not sure how well they work / never messed with them, but, they're out there already FWIW.
Guillame Herschel Gallente NME1	Posted - 2009.08.04 01:40:00 - [23] Ok then - just the database schema. Originally by: Sera Ryskin And I have no idea what this bull**** about gang or solo is about.
Xianthar STK Scientific The Initiative.	Posted - 2009.08.04 01:59:00 - [24] Originally by: Kuar Z'thain You would have to keep the Server/Client communications closed source or you're gonna have a ****-ton of uncatchable macros running around. why? wireshark would work just fine. if the communications is safe, its safe with or without the source being open, checks have to be done server side. as to the source, python in theory is de-compilable back to source do to the nature of the language. The source that was leaked years ago was output from decompyle, which was, at the time, open source python decompiling tool. Decompyle has since gone closed source, partially due to the eve backlash. it is only accessible via a "send in" for cash service now. The last free version only supports python 2.4, supposedly the send in service version supports 2.6, which would be required for the current version of eve. The send in service, for very good reason refuses to decompile code that is copyrighted / otherwise legally protected, as decompiling such code is illegal. in short the source isn't generally available and won't be.
Sharp Feather Gallente Aliastra	Posted - 2009.08.04 02:00:00 - [25] 3 words: **ing hypocrite OP. 3 words: ing hypocrite OP. 3 words: **ing hypocrite OP. LOGIC & MORE LOGIC
Kuar Z'thain Fraser's Finest Minor Threat.	Posted - 2009.08.04 02:06:00 - [26] Originally by: Xianthar Originally by: Kuar Z'thain You would have to keep the Server/Client communications closed source or you're gonna have a ****-ton of uncatchable macros running around. why? wireshark would work just fine. if the communications is safe, its safe with or without the source being open, checks have to be done server side. as to the source, python in theory is de-compilable back to source do to the nature of the language. The source that was leaked years ago was output from decompyle, which was, at the time, open source python decompiling tool. Decompyle has since gone closed source, partially due to the eve backlash. it is only accessible via a "send in" for cash service now. The last free version only supports python 2.4, supposedly the send in service version supports 2.6, which would be required for the current version of eve. The send in service, for very good reason refuses to decompile code that is copyrighted / otherwise legally protected, as decompiling such code is illegal. in short the source isn't generally available and won't be. Client/Server comms are encrypted. Or are you suggesting that CCP watch all their inbound packets to look for "something fishy"? My problem isnt just client->server comms, it's mostly server->client. You know you are sent grid-info prior to landing from warp?
Xianthar STK Scientific The Initiative.	Posted - 2009.08.04 02:19:00 - [27] Originally by: Kuar Z'thain Client/Server comms are encrypted. never bothered to look tbh, even if true the key is resident in your systems memory, getting it is not hard even if the app is using technology to randomize memory locations. encryption only protects data in transit, its kind of required to be available in an open form at each end point.
Taedrin Gallente Golden Mechanization Protectorate	Posted - 2009.08.04 02:19:00 - [28] Originally by: Khemul Zula Seriously. Look at it from a legal & copyright angle. Right now CCP owns the code. They can try to shutdown people running rogue servers. They can try to shutdown people copying their work. They can try to go after people who edit the game code without permission. Going open source and saying "here play with this all you want" sort of destroys all of that. Giving anyone who wants to run an EVE server the legal rights too is probably not something CCP wants to do. Legally speaking, "private servers" are not actually all that illegal. Unethical? That is debatable. CCP, and any other MMO producer would certainly assert that it is, as private servers directly compete against them using their own product, sweat and tears. The reason for this is that people who build private servers don't make an exact copy of CCPs code. In fact, they are often times creating an original work, as these people have no access to CCPs code. What they do is a bunch of packet sniffing and reverse engineer various algorithms and protocols used by the server to interact with the client. Please note that algorithms and protocols themselves can not be copyrighted. Only their implementations can. The algorithms and protocols would instead have to go through the patenting process. In the end, a private server is not a copy of tranquility, but an emulation of tranquility. And emulators themselves are not illegal, much to the chagrin of console companies. However, all of this is a moot point as CCP has most likely required all of us to agree to a EULA which forbids us from doing any of the above. Also, they could claim that private servers bypass CCP's DRM, much like what Blizzard did to shut down bnetd. Although, CCP doesn't use CD-keys so they might have more difficulty doing this.
Jason Edwards Internet Tough Guy	Posted - 2009.08.04 03:14:00 - [29] Quote: Jason, I think we both have some misconceptions here. Do you only want the Client open for **ing around with? If this is so then I honestly have no problem people contributing to a CCP-reviewed code base. Yes only the client. The middleware stuff and server stuff obviously needs to stay quiet. Quote: You still have issues with people seeing behind the UI but this really does nothing that a standard macroer can't accomplish with over-the-counter software. There's multiple issues here. The x-fer protocols/encryption and everything is going to still be closed. Sure they could sniff it and reverse engineer it. But they can do this either way. As I've said. They already have the code for the client. So the stuff "behind the UI" is already out and about. Quote:** My issue is when you say "Make Eve open source" that means Eve. All of it. Server and Client side. As it has been pointed out, this is a very bad idea. No. Thought I was clear in saying just the client. Obviously we cant bugtest and debugg the server. ------------------------ To make a megathron from scratch, you must first invent the eve universe. ------------------------ Life sucks and then you get podded.
Kismo	Posted - 2009.08.04 03:19:00 - [30] I would say that this isn't something that should probably happen, as much as I am an Open Source nut.

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.