DragonBox OpenSource Coding Competition - Rules (DRAFT!)

[_wb_]

One issue I have with open source if that I sit on top of a code base which has been generated by paying monthly wages to developers.

Well to me this seems to be an excellent reason to require contest entries to be open sourced. Let me explain.


You would get an unfair advantage if you could participate in the contest using a code base several man-months worth as a starting point, and be allowed to keep that code secret.


If you are required to release those sources, then fine, you might win this contest, but at least from then on, everyone can play around with that code and do nice new stuff with it, so the playing field is leveled again. Or you may choose not to release that code you are sitting on, and make something new altogether, which is also cool and fair. Or you may choose not to participate in the contest at all, and keep on releasing commercial titles, which is also fine with me (it doesn't contribute much to the homebrew scene, but it doesn't hurt either).


So in summary: I think requiring the entries to be open sourced makes the contest fairer, and more beneficial for the community as a whole. Even if that means there are less participants.


@iprice (is that IP-rice or i-price btw? or something else?): There are other reasons besides porting to make things open source (and preferrably Free as well). Allowing others to build upon what you created, letting them "stand on the shoulder of giants", that's in my opinion a more important part of the contribution than those nice little binary executables, no matter how many different platforms you're willing to compile them for.

 

[WizardStan]

I don't have to enter the competition - you are quite right.


I don't have to support the Pandora, GP2X, Wiz or Caanoo.

I'm not sure why you're listing these two together. Entering the competition is not the only way to support the consoles, it's a motivation to do so. If you want to make something closed source then do it. If you don't want to support them then the contest means nothing because you have no interest anyway.


Imagine we have a yarn company and they have a contest to knit something, one of the rules is that you must use their brand of yarn. Would you cry foul at this rule, arguing that people should be allowed to use whatever yarn they want? Can you honestly not see the reason why they would implement that rule? So here we have a contest to support open source consoles and in the spirit of open source it has been proposed that the entries must release their source code as well. Why, other than "I don't want to" is that necessarily a bad thing?

 

[iprice]

Using a specific type of wool is not the same as giving away your source code. You totally missed the context of my statement - that "I choose to support the Pandora and other opensource consoles."

So here we have a contest to support open source consoles and in the spirit of open source it has been proposed that the entries must release their source code as well.

I was responding to ED who stated that he might choose not to make source a requirement, which is what I initially replied to.


_wb_ (and WizardStan) I totally understand the reasons for open source. I do and have released source code freely and offer lots of code related assistance on coding forums that i frequent. But that was my choice.


As for my name -

I'm not the only one on here that objected to the original proposal - or even said anything about it first.

 

[WizardStan]

Using a specific type of wool is not the same as giving away your source code.

In the context of a contest having a rule which directly follows the original intention of the contest they are exactly the same thing.

You totally missed the context of my statement - that "I choose to support the Pandora and other opensource consoles."

That's great. You have yet to explain why that means that the contest should absolutely not have an source code requirement. The only thing that you and others have repeatedly said is that you don't like being forced to give your source away. That is entirely understandable but I don't feel it is a reasonable objection to this contest. The contest is intended to directly benefit consoles which are heavily based in open source, I don't see how it is unreasonable for them to also ask that contest entries


No one is forcing you to do anything, if you don't like it then you don't have to enter; continue to release your games and programs exactly as you have been. The contest is as much a motivation for those that haven't really been contributing lately as it is a promotion of the systems.

 

[Linux-SWAT]

I don't know why all this debates are happening.


GP32, GP2X, Wiz, OP, Canoo etc. are supposed to be open handhelds !


So having a contest on them should be open source...

 

[Rockthesmurf]

@_wb_: No real objections with what you said. I understand the interest of various parties. The main thing I wanted to get across is poorer quality results would come from forcing Open Source, at least for some developers. I hadn't actually considered the prize side of it, and can see the advantages potentially to be had, I was more interested in just getting more cool titles onto the Panora.

 

[Linux-SWAT]

The main thing I wanted to get across is poorer quality results would come from forcing Open Source, at least for some developers.

You don't really think that, don't you ?

 

[Rockthesmurf]

@linux-swat debates come from the fact there isn't a clear answer and instead a difference of opinion! You could argue the openness of the Panora puts the power in the developers hands to choose their license, and whether to be open or close source.


Having said that, I am very happy seeing it go Open Source, loads of cool advantages. ED asked for input/feedback so I think it is cool to see opinions from the community. Let's hope the vocal people will go on to contribute.

 

[Rockthesmurf]

You don't really think that, don't you ?

]

I can only offer my opinion, there will be some much more experienced people on here, but I am credited on 10+ AAA titles that have combined sales over 50 million, and I don't believe they would have had been better titles if for every game they were forced to start a new codebase, or avoid the use of certain libraries based on licensing, etc.

 

[Linux-SWAT]

Sales doesn't mean quality.


I'm credited on a 1M€ system i built alone used in only one university, and that system kills any proprietary alternative.

 

[Rockthesmurf]

Quality in your sense is presumably subjective, so not helpful in this nature of debate. However, I have already said I see both sides, I work on JamPlus and have added Panora support to it (as well as Android, WebOS, PlayBook, BB10 and more) it is open source, I have contributed to various other open source projects. Nothing against it, but when I say I could personally produce something better using closed source code I own, I don't see how I could be wrong! Each to their own.

 

[Linux-SWAT]

Quality is quality, open handhelds are open handhelds.


--EDIT: and Panora is Pandora

 

[erico]

I believe open whatever should let participants to choose what they want, to release their code or not, that is what open means to me, similar to open theme.


I see this is a discussion over draft rules of the compo, and by far good, that we state our opinions and discuss it further, should we feel like. It is best for a final compo rules.


Personally, I think that forcing code to be released is not a good thing, I think a compo is primarily about the entries not the code itself.


What about asking people to release the media in an open fashion? After all it is part of a game and porting needs to address not only the code, but consider different resolutions and all, so not final gfx or music, but actual projects, layered photoshop files, raw samples, 3d objects, etc. All in a fashion that we all can access using open software like gimp,blender, etc and preferably documented. This could also be extended to production pipelines and many other areas on a game/app production.


That way it would be truly open.

 

[Trezker]

If "opensource" is in the name of the compo, of course the entries have to be open source.


It's perfectly fine to hold a compo that allows closed source, that's up to the mind of the one organizing it.


It's a category just like anything else. If the compo has RPG in the title you can not submit games which do not place in the RPG genre.

 

[Rockthesmurf]

Erico has an interesting point, I certainly have a large amount of offline tools that process assets to be used in game, I use a custom build system to package everything up which runs on a CI server, etc. It would certainly be interesting to have a "full release" where a developers opens up everything for everyone to see. Although if I am honest, I tend to find most people like the notion of open source more than the practise, they like the fact they could look at the source, but often don't.

 

[Binky]

That's what freedom is about.


Having the ability to do things, not necessarily doing them.

 

[b_o_b]

I think most end users here are not against closed source stuff. I even think there is a group of users that think closed source and commercial is intrinsically better (I don't belong in that group ). Using an emulator usually means closed source roms are involved anyway.


For this competition I think the source should be released though GPL. The competition and prices are a gift from ED and IMO the coders should give code back to the him/community. Isn't the main reason for the competion to generating code anyway? If you don't like to share the code there is always the possibility to create the software and ask for donations or money for the software created.


If it is not prices you are after, but just like to join a competition maybe ED can create a separate category?


ED needs to decide though, it is his compo.


On a side note, I hope to see Microbes entering the competition, love that game!

 

[Binky]

prices!=prizes

 

[b_o_b]

prices!=prizes

Aha thank you for this priceless info. Prizeless though

 

[Zip]

as seen in "geca's competition"


force people to release source could lose entries...