[MUD-Dev] Source Code Release

[Richard Woolcock]

Greg Munt wrote:
> 
> This isn't a flame. Well, at least, I don't intend it to be one. There is
> a lot of rambling, and probably more bad assumptions. This may or may not
> be related to the ambiguity and 'fuzziness' of the subject matter.
> 
> On Wed, 11 Feb 1998, Richard Woolcock wrote:
> 
> > Greg Munt wrote:
> >
> > > 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.
> >
> > I'm also considering releasing some code, and have similar worries...
> > The real difference is that there is already an (old) copy of my code
> > which was stolen, and is floating around on the net.  Even if I release
> > my code, it was written when I was still learning C and some of it is
> > very badly written.
> >
> > Could I really bring myself to drop such a mud on the mudding community?
> > No...not normally - but at least it would be far better than the hacked-up
> > mess floating around at the moment (which some people who have copies of
> > are even selling, because I refuse to give out the code).
> >
> > At least if I did, it would be the first (to my knowledge) 'stock' leveless
> > mud (merc2.1 based), which might at least bring a little variety to the
> > stock scene.
> 
> Summary: you think that you should release crap code to the community,
> because its 'less crap' than that which is currently circulating - and
> does provide 'a little variety to the stock scene'.

The code currently in circulation is already being considered a stock base
by many people.  As far as 'adding a little variety'...well, it contains
more code than smaug, and has a completely different feel to any other
type of mud that I've ever played (it is basically 100% GoP).

[snip]

> If we were pure egotists, we would want to see unmodified versions of our
> code spread throughout the net. Wouldn't we? Perhaps, perhaps not. A

I would want to see the code changed - I am even considering only giving
copies to people who are first able to demonstrate good mud coding skills.

> steady flow of uninspiring stock muds condemns the base to ridicule on
> usenet (who claims that stock DIKU is a good piece of code?) - and
> indirectly, condemns us to it, too.

I admit that some of my code is bad - but the mud is fun to play, and isn't 
that what a 'good mud' is about?

[snip]

> This thread asks a question which has no real answer. It states what is
> good, and what is bad, about releasing our code to the masses. But it does
> not answer the question, "Am I adding any value, by releasing my code?"

Possibly, possibly not.  Perhaps I should answer with the question "Can
anyone know, until I've released my code?"

The fact of the matter is: A badly hacked up version of my code is already
being used (there are over half a dozen being run already).  Should I just
leave things as they are, or release a better version officially, thus 
stopping people charging money for copies of the code, as well as getting
recognition for the work I have done?

KaVir.