(30 Jul 15, 10:28PM)Halte Wrote: WE SPLIT. No reunification wanted.
Then why make this thread about merging contents, which is about unifying parts of the two code bases ?
For the record, I voted no to the poll because I don't think the two teams will agree on what to include in the official client (it's kind of hard to see what would be included exactly because no code is available anyway), and having people work on an alternative is always good no matter what the project is. However, the only way both sides will benefit from this is if everything is open source, for the reasons I mentioned in my earlier post (code reviews, community contributions, trust issues, no security by obscurity). If it doesn't happen, one side will always be seen as the guys who tried to take over AC, and the other side as the ones who didn't compromise to help the project evolve (which they are willing to, as far as I know).
→ Open source everything (or at least the client, which everybody downloads and runs on their computer, and maybe later the infrastructure stuff to allow distribution of the traffic).
(31 Jul 15, 01:57AM)Exodus Wrote: IronZorg, I am pretty sure Lucas' code is not opensource because it's not finished yet, he just does not want to see his work stolen by those who clearly saw the intention to steal it and then edit it to their own desires (EDIT: to make it clear, some people want to steal the code before it's finished, abd edit it to change the things they don't like, it has nothing to do with cheating). If his work is one day merged to the next version, it will be certainly opensource except for maybe some parts that could compromise the fight against cheaters (he wont release an anti-cheat source).
"Stealing code and editing it to their own desires" is merely improving what code already exists. AssaultCube would not exist if driAn hadn't edited the cube engine code to make it into AC. Code stealing is prevented against with licenses, and using already existing code to implement a new feature is progress, even if the code wasn't open in the first place, the feature would still be implemented somehow.
Not releasing such a critical unit such as the anticheat engine proves that it is not ready to be used: if you can go around it by reading the code, then it's obviously a pretty poor cheating detection system. The most secure/reliable algorithms are always open source to allow more than one person to understand it and eventually figure out why it's coming up with false positives, or how to improve it to prevent people from finding loopholes in the algorithms. AC did none of that, several good players have been (maybe wrongly) flagged as cheaters by the engine, and nobody who could have understand how they could have (presumably) been false positives had any chance of doing so because the code is inaccessible.
→ Open sourcing the code leads to improvments, not "stealing" (unless the licenses are not respected in which case it's only a matter of hurting the original coder's ego because the attribution is lacking), and any closed source security engine will work against its community.