Desura Game Client Is Now Open-Source

[benmoran]

So can someone tell me what (other than icons/branding/etc) is different between the open source and non-open-source versions of this client?

The branding is all that is different. The open source version is now the ONLY version of Desura. The one that you download directly from the Desura website will have the Desura branding, but community compiled versions will have to use the alternate name.

I think the hope is that like all good open source projects, the community will contribute features and bug-fixes back to the main project. There will undoutably end up being some crazy custom builds as well, that won't really fit the main project. Those guys can call it Desurium.

[benmoran]

Any more dangerous than proprietary GPU/scanner/wireless NIC blobs? I don't care about the games being installed locally, since many will probably require a separate purchase for each user. I just want the client installed globally and since its open source there isn't any significant risk if installed as root.

I'd say so, since GPU and Wireless blobs tend to be more widely used, and therefore more thoroughly scrutinized. I guess I do agree with what you're saying though. I have no problem with the client itself being installed globablly, as long as the games are local.

I just hate proprietary stuff in the system package manager (but don't mind proprietary games, in general).

[jonwil]

So can someone tell me what (other than icons/branding/etc) is different between the open source and non-open-source versions of this client?

[jhansonxi]

I think having to install it locally for each user is the way to go. Giving proprietary games root access is dangerous, and they don't really need it anyway. Desura is it's own standalone manager for the games anyway, so it can keep proprietary stuff out of the system.

Any more dangerous than proprietary GPU/scanner/wireless NIC blobs? I don't care about the games being installed locally, since many will probably require a separate purchase for each user. I just want the client installed globally and since its open source there isn't any significant risk if installed as root.

[leif81]

I'll be happy if it just shows up in a package manager instead of having to install it locally for each user.

I presume this is exactly what they intended. Easier acess to the client == more users.

[benmoran]

I think having to install it locally for each user is the way to go. Giving proprietary games root access is dangerous, and they don't really need it anyway. Desura is it's own standalone manager for the games anyway, so it can keep proprietary stuff out of the system.

That said, I love Desura and use it all the time. I think the way they do things now makes sense.

[jhansonxi]

I'll be happy if it just shows up in a package manager instead of having to install it locally for each user.

[FireBurn]

Desurium - looks like they're taking their open version naming convention form Google Chrome ie the chromium project

[elanthis]

Great news, however I have question marks with regards to having the server closed. I can understand that they are 'scared' of leaking info or getting hacked, but a properly developed server shouldn't have that problem to begin with

Is that why it's closed? Or is it closed for the sake of maintaining sales profits and to avoid fracturing the distribution channel?

We've got too much fragmentation already, between PSN, XBL, Steam, Android Market, iOS/OSX App Store, Windows Marketplace, Ubuntu One, iTunes, Amazon, Desura, EA's custom store, Ubisoft's custom store, etc. Most of these services are entirely redundant. Originally they existed separately as they targeted different platforms, but with the multi-platform stores being common-ish now, most of the rest only exist solely because some asshat marketeer wants to have access to user information that the other stores don't share or to better "control" market prices and the like.

The end result for actual users is almost entirely negative. Users want one place to buy apps/games, preferably with a Steam-like "one purchase, all platforms" approach. Users want a single list of all their friends, achievements, high scores, saved game backups, avatar customizations, etc. Users want to have just one account to remember and log in to. Users want only one entity responsible for securing their payment details. The community aspects of a fragmented "market marketplace" are hurt heavily, and the usability aspects of that fragmentation just frustrate users.

Releasing the server as FOSS has a myriad of user-oriented benefits inline with the tenets of GNU Manifesto and the OSI Mission, naturally. Releasing it so that the Astronaut can make his own fucked up fork does nobody except the Astronaut any good at all.

[oliver]

Great news, however I have question marks with regards to having the server closed. I can understand that they are 'scared' of leaking info or getting hacked, but a properly developed server shouldn't have that problem to begin with

Having said that, if it becomes popular, I wonder how long it takes for an opensource server to be developed by someone else. The protocol apparently, (from the client side anyway) is open. Then, how long for a client to be integrated into ubuntu software center as a 'virtual'-repository ...