[Scummvm-devel] Bringing our Core Code to another Level?
lordhoto at gmail.com
Mon Aug 12 19:32:25 CEST 2013
On 08/12/2013 06:05 PM, A. Milburn wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 06:52:00PM +0300, Eugene Sandulenko wrote:
>>> I think such a split off core resulting in an unbranded (i.e. no ScummVM
>>> name on it except for credits to its origins) project would be a really
>>> nice thing to do in the long run.
>> Now I completely fail to understand why we should not brand it as ScummVM
>> Library or ScummVM OSystem Library. Removing "ScummVM" brand from the
>> library title would diminish invaluable volunteer efforts of hundreds of
>> developers who made it exist in the first place.
> The branding isn't the name, though. If we leave it branded "ScummVM", then
> third-party projects would ship their binaries with "ScummVM" branding all
> over it. I don't think we want that (for support reasons if nothing else).
> Obviously it would be pointless to remove the ScummVM name from e.g. the
> credits or the source code or whatever; as Johannes said, we'd want to
> make sure that the origins of the code was clear and credited in any case.
As Alyssa correctly got I do not talk about stripping off references to
ScummVM (I actually said we should keep those credits). Rather replacing
our logo and other files specific to ScummVM (i.e. the bits which
ResidualVM replaces for example).
The idea would be to default to a crediting similar to what ResidualVM
does, i.e. have this note about ScummVM in their credits (you can see
that here: http://residualvm.org/credits/), keep ScummVM bits in the
headers of the source files, keep the ScummVM section in the COPYRIGHT
file, keep AUTHORS, etc. Thus when you run the binary built from the
core (but not built as ScummVM) you will not be set in a ScummVM branded
user environment. However, when looking at the sources/credits/About you
still see where the code is from and who contributed in the past.
More information about the Scummvm-devel