[MUD-Dev] Source Code Release

[Stephen Zepp]

Greg Munt wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 10 Feb 1998, Ben Greear wrote:
> 

> This is something I've wanted to post on, for a number of weeks. My own
> project will be shoving out all of the development docs onto the web:
> specification, design, testing, etc. Shoving out the source code would be
> a natural extension of this. BUT.

I released my ack!mud 4.2 ( merc derived, hack/slash mostly ) code base almost a
year ago, myself.  Primarily because so many people enjoyed the code base ( SoE,
the original mud using the base, was averaging around 100 players after being up
for 6 months ), and asked to have the code released.

> 
> I am wary of what will happen to my code - what it will be used to create
> - once I have made it available to the general public.
> 
> Advantages:
> 
>   The potential of really widespread beta testing

  yup...

> 
>   The potential of discussions about various elements of the
>   specification, design or implementation being produced, which can only
>   help the project.

  I run a mailing list for the merc derived code base I released...actually,
it's been very difficult to get much discussion at all.  Most coders on the list
are only there to get snippets for their mud, not release any of their own,
unfortunately.  This may be to the immaturity of the code base ( meaning that
it's only been out a year ), or the immaturity of the people using it, I haven't
quite figured which.

> 
>   Allowing people who can't or won't code, to be able to run something
>   that they otherwise could not.

Exactly...I estimate that 10 people whom had never looked at code in their life
are now working towards learning how to code a mud, based on the release of the
base.

> 
>   Potential design suggestions from these non-coders.

I've gotten exactly one design concept, a simple "mana stealer" flag for an
object, from one non-coder, in the year the base has been released.

> 
> Disadvantages:
> 
>   Code misused. Billions of exact replicas spring up everywhere. "Oh god,
>   another stock X-MUD..." Bearing in my mind my strong aversion to this
>   scenario, this is the main cause of my concern, really.

I currently have: 
  SoE, the original mud.
  AA, a result of a renegade coder stealing everything from my shell, then
setting it up, then trying to get a court order to shut my own mud down. 
Was...shall we say, interesting those months?
  LCN and SOR, two very original coders using the stock base as a starting
point.  Neither of these muds are active, and probably won't be for quite
awhile, but they are _very_ unique.  LCN in particular has done some incredible
work, and is taking the hack/slash concept in directions I would have never
dreamed of, while remaining hack/slash ( for them, a good thing ).
  TEG/CELV/LOV/DS/SD/many others.  This is a funny one...this one coder has set
up at _least_ 7 muds, all with the stock, all pretending to be run by different
people.  I have never figured out his motivation, since he shuts down/loses most
of them after a month or so.
  Anywhere from 3 to 5 pure stock ( areas, code, etc.) copycats, which have
actually not done too poorly...the code base seems to be popular enough that
copycats can still get 10-20 players without too much work.
> 
>   Everyone can see how bad my code is. It's not that bad, honest.

Hehehe..mine is/was.  I've developed and matured over the last two years, but
the ack release is basically my learning curve, described in painful detail.
> 
>   If, by some quirk of fate, it becomes a popular base, my mailbox will
>   be bombarded with questions from clueless newbie admin. The result is
>   what I call "Re: George Reese".

Ack has something called IMC ( intermud chat, similar to the irc style stuff
that lp has )...I am no longer visible at any time while logged in, because of
the endless stream of completely rediculous questions I was getting.  However, I
do enjoy helping people that really have dedication to coding, instead of just
wanting me to do everything for them, and in 2 cases, have learned a lot about
my own code ( well, about stock merc, I guess :) ) from helping them with any
issues they were working on.

> 
>   If it becomes popular, and is misused, its name (and mine) will have a
>   bad reputation.

I was worried about this, myself, but I think that the code stands on it's own
merits, and anyone that misuses it ( I have had a problem or two with
backdoor/loopholes being used on other muds because of my release ) can only be
the ones to blame, not myself.  This, of course, is my opinion!

> 
>   It's not a legal requirement to follow the distribution license. Even
>   if it was, could I really afford to sue thousands of people (presuming
>   the code became popular)? And would I want to attract the inevitable
>   negative publicity to myself and the game, through such legal actions?
>   (See: TSR)
> 
> I'm thinking of not putting a tgz file anywhere, but instead putting the
> source in HTML files, and annotating it fully. But that still doesn't
> totally deal with the above.

I personally think this would be only useful if you broke the html down into
_very_ well documented and logical groupings, so that people could learn
specific topics about your code they were interested in.  I would never in a
million years dig through a code base using html...it's way, way, way too
efficient ( I don't have a cable modem or anything like that ), and there are
plenty of other code bases out there I could just download/install.

Z