Godot 3.0

why is MIT cuck?

name another foss linux game engine.

love2d
torque
haxe

pygame (not that i'm recommending it other than for learning purposes)

Godot is pretty fun to mess with

lol
kys retards.

...

...

pajeet please

...

Unimpressive sort of repeating sequence of digits of truth have spoken.

Why not just use Blender game engine?
Okay that is pretty fucking cool, Would port to BSDs and Haiku for bragging rights.

It's not copyleft, and therefore does jack shit to protect anybodies freedom.

Anybody's

Pretty much ANY open source engine is a Linux game engine.

Is Godot still making progress with the Vulkan support?

Yes

Godot script is slow as fuck. Good luck having a scene with more than a couple hundred physics bodies in it.

Aren't they adding C# support to make it faster?

use c++

GDscript is fine for what it's designed for. If you find that your scene with 200 physics bodies is too slow, you're expected to write C++ extensions to Godot to handle such a requirement.

C# support in Godot isn't intended to improve the software performance. Its intent is to allow programmers more ways to interface with the engine.

C# to pull in people who are used to unity but cant bother moving languages to C++ for some reason

Get the fuck out.

People like you are why people don't use the GPL.

Who cares, there hasn't been a good game in around half a decade.

I disagree

2017 - 2012 = ?

Nice vintage maymay, I forgot about that

It's a decent game.
Too bad it's under a proprietary license.

wow, sounds like an amazing game engine to not use

MIT
Prevents:
-nothing
-Not international
Authorize:
-Closing the source
-DRMs
-Selling the software or services.

GPLv3
Prevents:
-Closing the source
-DRMs
-Tivoization
-International license
Authorize:
-Selling the software or services.

No but it lets people use it in a bad way.
The developers aren't required to share the source of a binary
Reminder that android was completely tivoized at the beginning and it's a piece of crap because google purged every piece GPLv3 software.

People like you don't understand licensing.

pajeet is angry

First and foremost, Godot was designed to be a highly flexible while generic game engine and development environment. Their focus is on providing a solid while flexible development environment. They've made it easy for knowledgeable C++ programmers to extend the engine in ways that the Godot team wasn't ready to deal with - such as efficiently rendering 200 physics bodies within a single scene.

Sounds like MIT is more free.

Sure, but in a similar way to how laws that don't prohibit theft are more free.
I am not meaning to imply that proprietary software is theft

how to explain grsec going fully closed, then

Everyone who gets a copy of the software can get a copy of the source code, the right to modify it, and (narrowly) the right to distribute it.

I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.

Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called "Linux", and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.

There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called "Linux" distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.

It just so happens that to every free software licensed under GPL there's an objectively better alternative licensed under either BSD-like license or completely public domain.

Absolutely fuck all licenses have even been given an international or legal test, if you're going to measure robustness of a license by court appearances then we should all use CDDL.

That's the same as permissive faggot.
Juniper using FreeBSD base didn't stop FreeBSD.

Free in the sense of no rules, yes.
But does the freedom to take away freedom truly freedom ?

Yes and ?
Considering your logic if they would have licensed the software under GPL it would be the GPL that would be better.
The license isn't something important for the quality of code.
But it's important to stay in control of your tools.

Well you just illustrated that "freedom" as a concept is self-contradictory.

GPLv2 legal loophole because it's derivative work from the linux kernel and can't be under GPLv3 (thank you Torvalds).
Corrected in GPLv3.

Anyway if you buy the patch you can still share it with anyone.
Note:
The developers are just mad because intel and other corporates thrash added the software in some of their proprietary solution and thus violating the GPL.
They asked a small fee for their work to the multi-billion dollar companies and they told them to fuck off.
grsecurity.net/announce.php

No, permissive doesn't require developers from sharing the source when asked.

Like it or not you live in a democracy(well I assume you live in a corrupted democracy).
Like it or not the law is law and we don't live in the care-bear world we're everyone is willing to share how their tools works.
When people can have direct power over another they always try to subjugate them one way or another.
Removing the freedom to skullfuck your neighbor because you want and can isn't I think a bad thing.
Or would you like me to legally and forcefully fuck your wife in front of you ?
Unfortunately most people are still dumb m8.
We see it all the time especially in IT.
Maybe one day people will learn to just live with one another without fucking themselves in the process , I believe that the GPL can help this, but we won't be alive to see that.

Blender 2.8 is supposed to be a big update right?

Eevee's nowhere near production ready and some viewport features like solid and wireframe view are still missing, so prepare to keep two versions around if they decide to rush it.

I agree with you but as it seems BSD-like licenses attract support from big companies which increases the quality of the code because these companies can later use this software in their products without being forced to release them under GPL.

I like the idea of GPL but I don't understand one thing: what actually stops anyone from looking at the source code of your GPL-licensed program, writing their own version of the same program (changing a bunch of things here and ther to make it look different) while looking at your code and releasing it under the different license? It doesn't even have to be better, because some people will use it just because it's not under GPL.

It wasn't an argument, but thanks for the autism.

Get out of my threads, frenchie.

Freedom can't be defended or tampered with, that's what makes it free. Even in a situation like preventing slavery, what you say you're doing is "fighting for freedom", which isn't inherently bad morally, but it is still restrictive and goes against the idea of freedom. It's ironic to say you're defending freedom or to say you support "true freedom" by taking it away from people by adding clauses and stipulations, this is true under any means/excuse. Freedom is free, no exceptions.

I understand the ideals behind the GPL but it is anything but "freedom". Every supporter of it needs to stop masquerading, all it does is make people seem disingenuous, like they're trying to trick you by redefining longstanding terms just to gain users, pushing faux-freedom as actual freedom.

I would never stand against the GPL or its ideals but I simply cannot stand how awful the messaging is, everything is a lie. I would love for people to simply be honest about it. Those that call it "copyleft" are much better than those who call it "freedom", but the term "copyleft" still has fuck all to do with actual freedom, just this new thing they've defined and try to pass off as actual freedom. I can't stand these crafty JEWISH TRICKS any more.

I actually agree that GPL "freedom" amounts to "things I like are allowed and things I don't like are not", which is why I am more of a BSD guy myself.
Ideally all software would be free, but, like all the other bad stuff in the world, trying to force people out of it is just a hack that backfires whenever it really matters.

GOD DAMN FUCKING FRENCHFAGS WITH THEIR STUPID MOTHERFUCKING POINTLESSLY DOUBLY SPACED PUNCTUATION. HOLY FUCK GODDAMN WHEN WILL YOU STUPID FROGS EVER LEARN? REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

Freedom != Anarchy

Your fundamental premise is that they do.

I'm going to assume you are of the camp of "negative liberty", please note that not everyone agrees on your definition of what "freedom" is. I am of the camp of the actual, literal, longstanding, "freedom".
Specifically this

I dont' know what you're talking about. I ain't go no fancy book learnin on how to philosophize. All I know is that your rights end when someone else's begin. You can't run around killing people and call it freedom. You can do whatever you want with your life liberty and property, so long as you don't infringe on other people's life liberty and property. BSD is a murder spree, GPL is the Declaration of Independence.

My fundamental premise is that an authority that sets boundaries on what I am allowed to do is contrary to my freedom, which seems like a pretty uncontroversial notion.
Though actually, if you take anarchy in its literal sense, "lack of authorities", then Freedom == Anarchy.

This is apparent.
But you'll run your mouth anyway.
This is Rousseau's conception of Right, which is deeply tied into the "negative conception of freedom" user talks about.
Literally speaking, you can. Why would you do it though? That's the important question that you fail to address.
This isn't even true by the standards of your Rousseau-esque notion of freedom. In fact, I can tell you are just spouting dogma lines because it doesn't even fit the use case we are presently discussing: namely, you propose that my right to do what I wish with my property (software) infringes on your liberty.
Now this is just demagogy, not even worth addressing.

When people make 2 posts with 1 reply each instead of just 1 post with multiple replies, it triggers my autism. Please refrain from doing that if you can avoid it.

The BSD license reminds me of the time that someone nestle? tried to own all the water in that South American country.

I figured since the discussion branched I would make a post for each instead of trying to merge two parallel discussions potentially talking about different things.

Again with the demagogy, and this time I even the semblance of a (false) equivalence is lacking.

It would be really easy to spot. You'd have a program with the exact same features and overall structure.
In some jurisdictions, exactly reimplementing a program from scratch without the original license applying requires that you've never even looked at the source code (decompiled or otherwise). This is an issue for Wine.

The blender devs should really improve on their painting tools, right now it looks fucking alpha software tier.

the user you're loosing your arguement to is more humble, articulate, intelligent sounding and probably less formally educated than you, and most of all isn't a gigantic (cuck) faggot

waste of trips

shamed samefag detected?

No, he's right.

You can play Doom with vulkan enabled in wine 2.

Godot has strange affiliations on Twitter like GirlsCode or someshit. But just like one Holla Forums user said about SJW Raspberry Pi, Affiliation isn't important, it's what you make with said product.

user could have been 100% right, if RPi hardware was free. However, godot doesn't cost a single penny, affiliation literally doesn't matter. Go trigger the community with a radically anti-feminist Holla Forums-meme riddled game with their own engine. They will probably ignore it, but it's there and there's nothing they can do about it.

WHAT MATTERS IS WHAT YOU DO WITH THE ENGINE