A New Open-Source Game Engine Being Released

[Juan Linietsky]

Looks promising!
Do you plan to add support for .blend files?
Also I have 2 questions about animation: does it support IK and does editor for 3D animation looks similar to 2D or is it for example node-based like mecanim in Unity?

There is a blender export plugin, which supports exporting IK. It has an animation tree player which is similar to mecanim, but works a little different. Animation support itself is a little different too, as you can animate a complete scene in Blender or any other 3D authoring tool, with multiple characters, objects and actions, import it and reproduce it in real time.

[Juan Linietsky]

I don't think so. If the authors had portability in mind since the begining, they already wrote abstractions, and cleaning the console related code is just deleting a folder and taking some options out of the build system. And having support for so many platforms makes me think they did.

For the most part it's done exactly as you mention, but there's some libraries that are non redistributables that need to be removed, specially from the iOS and Andrioid backends, plus doing some clean up and fixing the headers properly.

My guess is they intended to do so since moment zero, and for some reason didn't; mostly because looking for the engine I found a lot of empty sites from years ago, all of them related to free software projects.

There was always the wish do do it about 6 or more years ago, but at some point we realized it wasn't worth it until it's really mature and proven.

[neuron]

This looks really cool!

How are you planning on releasing the source? If you dump it on github it should be a lot easier for a community to build around it than if you pack it in a zip and put it on a webpage...

[IanS]

This looks rather promising. I've actually been looking at a number of engines lately and haven't decided on one to go with yet. I am mostly looking to do 2d games using 3d assets made in Blender, so this may turn out to be a good fit.

If you dump it on github it should be a lot easier for a community to build around it than if you pack it in a zip and put it on a webpage...

I second this; going with github would probably work out best.

[GreatEmerald]

GPL or LGPL would make matters difficult for developers trying to distribute games for iOS or Windows 8.

Hmm, I'm honestly curious what makes it so? I never used any iOS devices and only helped one person upgrade to Windows 8, so I don't know much about those platforms, but I also never heard of any problems with GPL software on them?

[IanS]

Hmm, I'm honestly curious what makes it so? I never used any iOS devices and only helped one person upgrade to Windows 8, so I don't know much about those platforms, but I also never heard of any problems with GPL software on them?

https://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/no-gpl-apps-for-apples-app-store/8046

[brosis]

The choice for MIT license wasn't about being brave, It's pretty much the only license it could be opened as.
GPL or LGPL would make matters difficult for developers trying to distribute games for iOS or Windows 8. Even BSD forces to credit the author. I personally don't want anyone using it to have that those extra hassles.

What exactly linders GPL or LGPL library to be used as dependency within project of random license on iOS or W8?

Chances are, you can close source everything and leave(see Unigine) or retract the copyright and switch license (see Nexuiz) or get sued over patent infridgement(see FAT fs case over Android) - only GPL3/LGPL(copyleft) and Apache 2(opensource) offer any patent protection.

This vulnerabilities taken in account, MIT is not the license you are searching for, unless these are features, not vulnerabilities.

Thanks!

[curaga]

And for the Windows 8 store:

http://osswatch.jiscinvolve.org/wp/2012/10/05/open-source-and-the-windows-store/

MS is ok with GPL being there, and explicitly says so; the GPL is not ok about MS placing additional restrictions.

[Marc Driftmeyer]

I'd rather see effort put into the BGE by Blender.

[brosis]

https://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-sour...app-store/8046

If distribution channel conflicts with GPL clause 6, the written offer valid for 3rd party allows to get source code from developer, including his modifications solely to AGPL or entire if GPL, or the library upstream.

The only way when Apple ToS might come in conflict with LGPL/GPL, is when Apple Store makes modifications to this library itself and refuses to release the source of those modifications. Use of encryption to run the software is question does not change the source of the binary, GPL does not require one to publish encryption source code, if he wants to execute the code with encryption compared to non-encrypted way (in fact, FSF endorses HTTPS).

VLC landed into purge not because of GPL being incompatible, but due to the chain of events:
They used GPL2, omitting the "or later", because they explicitly wanted tivoization and being unprotected against patent threats.
They failed to start discussion with Apple on the matter.
They were as well sabotaged, in your link notice the comments of Jean-Baptiste regarding friendship.
And finally, they completely omitted the resolution I outlined above.