|
that's a drag
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 02:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 20:44 |
|
|
what svn gui is best
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 02:48
|
|
|
eclipse or visual studio
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 02:51
|
|
|
fleshweasel posted:what svn gui is best not tortoise, that's 4 drat sho
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 02:54
|
|
|
Luigi Thirty posted:Hard Drivin' supported up to 5 (I think) game boards connected via serial link to the master board which showed the scene from different angles, multi monitor 3D in 1988 what about a TT, you could explore all the awesome poo poo the 68030 lets you do hell you could port your 3D code to it
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 03:15
|
|
|
mit is pretty good but apache 2 is strictly better unless you have ideological objections to patent indemnification or something
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 03:24
|
|
|
How do people feel about BSD3? I'm trying to decide on a license for an astronomy library that I'm writing in Haskell, and the Haskell community seems to favor BSD3, so I was considering using that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 03:27
|
|
|
it's fine BSD-new or MIT can make things slightly easier for people who want to take and use something as part of a larger system but if everybody else is using BSD-3 then there's no reason not to use it
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 03:41
|
|
|
VikingofRock posted:How do people feel about BSD3? I'm trying to decide on a license for an astronomy library that I'm writing in Haskell, and the Haskell community seems to favor BSD3, so I was considering using that. 4 clause is "i'm not endorsing your product, anything you release with this code needs to say it uses it" 3 clause is "just don't make it look like i'm endorsing your product" 2 clause is "just do whatever, idgaf"
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 03:43
|
|
|
VikingofRock posted:How do people feel about BSD3? I'm trying to decide on a license for an astronomy library that I'm writing in Haskell, and the Haskell community seems to favor BSD3, so I was considering using that. go with what the community uses i release all ruby things under an apache license, because that's what ruby hellfuckers want to see
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 04:11
|
|
|
use whats common in your industry/lang/framework. don't use wtfpl. if you have no drat idea at all, use mit just dont use wtfpl
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 04:31
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:eclipse or visual studio visual studio doesn't have a built in gui for this does it? I use visualsvn and its meh
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 04:38
|
|
|
eschaton posted:what about a TT, you could explore all the awesome poo poo the 68030 lets you do TTs and Falcons are ridiculously expensive and I'm not spending 600 dollars on this idiot project I'll forget about in a month I did grab a 68k assembler for the ST (the emulator and assembler both support all 68k series CPUs) and a bunch of ST reference manuals though. the software architecture is interesting there's the BIOS which handles low-level peripheral interaction, the XBIOS which handles high-level hardware interaction, and GEMDOS which does all the fancy back-end TOS magic and provides a VT52-compatible text console too. GEM provides the VDI device-independent graphics library (which uses graphics primitives run via invalid opcodes and an exception handler!) and the AES user interface which gives you a multitasking desktop. and 500 pages of documentation to figure out how it all works together Luigi Thirty fucked around with this message at 05:34 on Aug 29, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 05:18
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:why would you use command line tools? are you from 1970? I bet this joker doesn't even use the best development environment: Emacs
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 05:19
|
|
|
Bloody posted:use whats common in your industry/lang/framework. don't use wtfpl. if you have no drat idea at all, use mit yah if you're gonna use a joke idiot license use abrms
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 05:21
|
|
|
don't use joke idiot licenses
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 05:22
|
|
|
fleshweasel posted:visual studio doesn't have a built in gui for this does it? I use visualsvn and its meh I use ankhsvn or w/e. it integrates w/ the vs team stuff.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 05:24
|
|
|
cinci zoo sniper posted:thanks everyone for licencing advice, mit it is. i dont give a poo poo what all 0 people are going to do with it, as long as it's least amount of hassle for them mit is the least amount of hassle if you're looking to make it public domain, i'd recommend the cc0 license
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 05:43
|
|
|
i use gpl3 for personal stuff with the attitude that if someone's gonna mess around with it and share-alike then have a blast but if they're gonna throw it into something thats closed off then gently caress you pay me of course none of my personal projects are worth any of that but i can still pretend
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 05:54
|
|
|
Bloody posted:don't use joke idiot licenses i think bloody might have revealed his trigger words by accident
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 06:11
|
|
|
given that we're going licence talk, on the off chance i ever finish my game i'd like to sell it, but still have the source be open. is there a licence that's like "please don't just download and compile the source, remove the 'please consider buying/donating' message, and start selling it as your own. if you want to use snippets in your own projects though, or learn from this go nuts"
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 08:37
|
|
|
i mean i'm directly copying snippets from an apache licensed project in order to get things started for example
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 08:39
|
|
|
gonadic io posted:given that we're going licence talk, on the off chance i ever finish my game i'd like to sell it, but still have the source be open. you can do this just by not including the non-code parts of the game (e.g. art assets, levels, etc.) in the bit you're open-sourcing. if someone wants to use your code for inspiration/copy your implementation of something/whatever they can totally do that, while if someone wants to take it and sell it themselves they have to put so much work in that it becomes more of a homage or a clone than a straight knock-off.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 09:08
|
|
|
Jabor posted:you can do this just by not including the non-code parts of the game (e.g. art assets, levels, etc.) in the bit you're open-sourcing. if someone wants to use your code for inspiration/copy your implementation of something/whatever they can totally do that, while if someone wants to take it and sell it themselves they have to put so much work in that it becomes more of a homage or a clone than a straight knock-off. i see, so in order to do this i'd need non-code parts of my game and possibly also code parts of my game? i'll bear it in mind should i get that far. fakeedit: https://github.com/djmcgill/carved/ but FFIing into unity is pissing me off so i'm rewriting the rendering in rust using gfx
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 09:36
|
|
|
yeah it's similar to how id open-sourced the quake engines, content remains non-free but the engine becomes GPL
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 11:40
|
|
|
gonadic io posted:
no licence (all rights reserved), but source on github
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 12:10
|
|
|
quiggy posted:it only works with us because we're a small company. svn's branch support is so loving bad that i can't even begin to imagine it working in a setting of 10 or more programmers uh, just develop on trunk? easy! every time someone branches here it ranges from a small to a large mess. it's probably down to no one having much useful experience with svn (other than right click -> commit...) and our project structure being unbelievably lovely i think svn would be fine with a better team. i don't like how slow it is when checking out a new branch, but eh people who use svn properly: do you check out just trunk + relevant branches, or everything at once?
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 12:52
|
|
|
LeftistMuslimObama posted:not tortoise, that's 4 drat sho nah, tortoise is legit good
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 12:54
|
|
|
Luigi Thirty posted:Hard Drivin' supported up to 5 (I think) game boards connected via serial link to the master board which showed the scene from different angles, multi monitor 3D in 1988 hard fuckin drivin' :woot: http://www.jmargolin.com/schem/schems.htm
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 13:02
|
|
|
huh. i thought :woot: was an emoticon.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 13:03
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 13:06
|
|
|
Bloody posted:don't use joke idiot licenses
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 13:29
|
|
|
the most offensive thing about them to me is how they're not even funny
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 13:30
|
|
|
GameCube posted:huh. i thought :woot: was an emoticon. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 13:30
|
|
|
Symbolic Butt posted:the most offensive thing about them to me is how they're not even funny much like you're postinG!!!!
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 13:37
|
|
|
redleader posted:uh, just develop on trunk? easy! we just develop straight on trunk, but it only really works because we have a grand total of 5 software goons. i can't imagine a large project only on trunk Skim Milk posted:I bet this joker doesn't even use the best development environment: Emacs vim supremacy motherfucker
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 13:41
|
|
|
quiggy posted:vim supremacy motherfucker you can run vim in emacs so emacs is a superset of vim and bigger is better unless you're some kind of america-hating hippie traitor
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 13:46
|
|
|
Soricidus posted:america-hating hippie traitor this is me to a tee tho
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 13:48
|
|
|
theres nothing hard about multiple branch development on svn
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 14:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 20:44 |
|
|
quiggy posted:we just develop straight on trunk, but it only really works because we have a grand total of 5 software goons. i can't imagine a large project only on trunk i've recently started using visual studio code for rust development on mac and i like it so far. a longer startup time than ST3 (so it won't replace it as my general text editor) but developed by an actual team, has support for ligatures ( https://github.com/tonsky/FiraCode ) which I like
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 14:29
|
|