[Scummvm-devel] Bringing our Core Code to another Level?

Filippos Karapetis bluegr at gmail.com
Mon Aug 12 21:17:44 CEST 2013

Yes, sorry, my mistake: of course I meant sev, LordHoto and wjp as members
of the "core" team.


On Monday, August 12, 2013, Arnaud Boutonné wrote:

> Also, as far as I know, the Core Team is currently LordHoto, sev and
> wjp... But that's a detail.
> Arnaud
> On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 8:49 PM, Filippos Karapetis <bluegr at gmail.com<javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'bluegr at gmail.com');>
> > wrote:
>> I find this a very good idea as well. We could separate the core OSystem
>> from the engines themselves, and extend its usage to other, non-adventure
>> 2d/3d games.
>> I assume that the plan is to split the project into two separate ones,
>> possibly with different maintainers per project. Thus, engine developers
>> will not have write access to OSystem itself, right? Again, I assume that
>> only the "core team" (LordHoto, wjp, fuzzie, possibly others too?) will
>> maintain the OSystem project? Or will all developers have write permissions
>> to the OSystem core?
>> Regards
>> Filippos
>> On Monday, August 12, 2013, Paul Gilbert wrote:
>> I'd certain be in favour of a scheme like that, speaking from experience
>> as someone who's also interested in re-developing non '2D point and click
>> adventure games', as well as other genres. I think we'd all agree that
>> ScummVM has a pretty sophisticated and mature core, and would love to see
>> it made more accessible to people planning their own reimplementation
>> projects.
>> As I see it, there are two parts of the discussion. The technical and
>> managerial. For the technical, as already discussed, some separation of
>> ScummVM into the core library that could be easily shared would be ideal.
>> As for the managerial, I haven't been involved in any discussions with
>> companies as Arnaud has, but his argument makes sense to me. There have
>> been offerings from certain companies in the past other than the 2-D
>> adventures, and having that option open still in the future, would IMHO, be
>> a good thing. As Arnaud says, we could have authorised ScummVM micro groups
>> for things outside ScummVM perview. So, for example, if we get more RPGs in
>> the future, we'd have the option to smoothly implement support and provide
>> executables for them without having to have them as part of the main binary
>> engine list.
>> This may even have some side benefits for the main project, in that game
>> companies that have seen our track record with any of their games may be
>> more inclined to release other suitable adventure games for the main
>> project later on.
>> Paul.
>> On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 12:50 PM, Arnaud Boutonné <strangerke at scummvm.org
>> > wrote:
>> Hi everybody
>> Concerning the branding, I can tell you that the name 'ScummVM' is very
>> well known and is a real help when you contact people. In my case, it's
>> essentially in order to discuss about legal rights, sources and
>> distributing games.
>> So, wouldn't it be possible to imagine some kind of umbrella
>> organization, with micro-orgs lying under , and try to structure something
>> based on that? the micro-orgs would benefit the aura of ScummVM and it's
>> core, and could focus on specific engines specifcally rejected by ScummVM
>> (Arcade games, RPG games, whatever).
>> Regards,
>> Arnaud
>> On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 6:24 PM, Einar Johan Trøan Sømåen <
>> einarjohants at gmail.com> wrote:
>> The various sub components are somewhat interdependent, i.e., surface
>> is used a lot in video/, and almost anything in Common/ is used more
>> or less everywhere.
>> Den 12.8.2013 kl. 18:14 skrev Adrian Astley <adastley at gmail.com>:
>> > What if we were to create individual libraries for different subsets
>> > of the core? Aka, have one .lib for graphics, one for audio, etc. That
>> > would allow third parties to choose which parts they want and which
>> > they don't.
>> >
>> > RichieSams
>> >
>> >
>> > On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 11:05 AM, A. Milburn
>> > <fuzzie at users.sourceforge.net> 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
>> _______________________________________________
>> Scummvm-devel mailing list
>> Scummvm-devel at lists.sourceforge.net <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
>> 'Scummvm-devel at lists.sourceforge.net');>
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/scummvm-devel

"Experience is the name every one gives to their mistakes" - Oscar Wilde
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.scummvm.org/pipermail/scummvm-devel/attachments/20130812/15b68680/attachment.html>

More information about the Scummvm-devel mailing list