Informational non-content on Bananas

[ChillCore]

I guess I will not be uploading my little choochoo mod for minecraft then, at least not to bananas.

That external link to GrfCrawler is a great idea by the way.

[frosch]

So implicitly the devs have the right to remove anything as they see fit?

How could it be different? We are not the government. Also it would be troublesome if we would have to remove illegal (adult/racist/...) content while being bound to hosting it.

[Transportman]

So implicitly the devs have the right to remove anything as they see fit?

How could it be different? We are not the government. Also it would be troublesome if we would have to remove illegal (adult/racist/...) content while being bound to hosting it.

Just verifying that I understood it correctly, already assumed it.

[kamnet]

Furthermore, the terms of service does not state that we have to distribute or accept everything. It is merely about granting bananas the rights to perform its duty (repackaging and redistributing).

So implicitly the devs have the right to remove anything as they see fit?

They always have. They're just very much don't want to do so because it is time consuming. I once had a file uploaded that had some issues with loading in OpenTTD, but I couldn't upload a new version to overwrite it. It took Planetmaker a few hours to remove the file and fix the database so that upload could be attempted again.

[Morgs]

Thank god I don't get involved in the politics side on here and Simuscape.

The fruit place is where I can get GRF's which I can get easily. Some other GRF's I have to go through different websites. The GRF list wiki page is my gateway if I go externally.

At the end of the day, I want to play this

[Darkvater]

Wow, I just wasted two hours reading through the latest episode of TTD drama... so nice to check back once in a while

I am a bit late to the whole conversation it seems, but let me voice my opinion anyways: I do not believe what ozTrans did is right, he should not put up this file. What makes things even worse is, that for the link provided to Simuscape you need to jump through several hoops just to get to the actual content. But enough of that.

I really like kamnet's idea of providing alternative sources to bananes. Instead of a single hard-coded repository OpenTTD could support a list of repositories - with minimal development effort. Simuscape users could then put their content on this now Pineapples system and manage it themselves. Yes, not ideal, but possibly worth thinking about?*

...because in the world of apt you can have multiple repositories, and if an author wants their work only on one specific repository, then you can direct apt to use that specific repository to request that file. We don't have that with OpenTTD. All we have to work with is BaNaNaS, there is no alternative repository.

[*] ever since we started working on this project backwards-compatibility has been a holy grail and therefore removing content from Bananas is never going to happen. Some people find this unacceptable. Each their own opinion, now they can run their own repository as they see fit.

[Michi_cc]

Simuscape users could then put their content on this now Pineapples system and manage it themselves. Yes, not ideal, but possibly worth thinking about?

So r25024 is not enough for you?

-- Michael Lutz

[kamnet]

Having a link to GRFCrawler is nice (and should have been thought of long ago), but OpenTTD doesn't plug into GRFCrawler's search function, and the user is left still trying to figure out how to use the site, rather than have it seamlessly integrated as with BaNaNaS. But, baby steps.

[Supercheese]

OpenTTD doesn't plug into GRFCrawler's search function...

Doesn't it, though?

[Darkvater]

Simuscape users could then put their content on this now Pineapples system and manage it themselves. Yes, not ideal, but possibly worth thinking about?

So r25024 is not enough for you?

-- Michael Lutz

I agree with kamnet on this one. This doesn't really do anything to help. The user still needs to go through all the hoops of finding the content; for all you know the GRF might still only be the infamous i-version on GRFCrawler. The user still has to download it, figure out the proper folder to save the content to*, rescan directory / restart OTTD, etc. It won't work. The commit should be reverted when alternate repositories are supported.
Additionally, we should maybe have servers advertise their own custom repositories to add transparently to the list already there for the user so any content from non-official repos can be used instantenously.

On a slightly unrelated note, if someone** had time it would be really worthwhile to expand bananas to incorporate grfcrawler features. Search (by name, grfid, category, author?), show preview picture and explanation. Basically whatever shows up in the OpenTTD description + a user-defined picture. It would be complete then in my view.

[*] I bet 70% of the users by no don't even know what a grf is, and where it goes, thanks to bananas which made the whole thing transparent; and this is a good thing.
[**]If there is interest I might give it a go, but let me first buy a computer again. Ever since I moved to HK, all I've had at home is my gf's macbook 13", which is hardly usable for any kind of development
[/i]

[Supercheese]

Honestly, use Bananas (the way it was meant to be used) if you want to make it super-easy for users to download and install your grf, scenario, etc. If you don't want to use Bananas, then you're going to have to deal with the fact that you're making it much harder for users to download and install your content. You should not complain and/or beg for an alternative method. I see no reason at all OTTD devs should cater to people who refuse to use Bananas; this grfcrawler search business is pure grace on their behalf IMO.

[kamnet]

And I don't see anything wrong with asking them to consider expanding upon BaNaNaS and encouraging alternate repositories which can host content which they find objectionable on their own server, and that they also do not have to be responsible for monitoring and distributing.

Adding a link to GRFCrawler is nice, but eis_os has announced his intentions a few times to eventually close the service down, nor is he able to transfer the code that runs the server to somebody else. It's nice that he's reconsidered his stance a couple of times now, but I don't think we can depend on that forever.

[Rubidium]

And I don't see anything wrong with asking them to consider expanding upon BaNaNaS and encouraging alternate repositories which can host content which they find objectionable on their own server, and that they also do not have to be responsible for monitoring and distributing.

You are aware that it is likely that an 'evil' alternative repository comes to light which distributes all content from Simuscape's, mb, and all others that did not want to have their content on bananas for whatever reason? Without these authors being able to get stuff removed because the 'evil' repository owner is not responding. For the users this would be a great step as then all content is available from just two servers.

I could imagine server owners that want to use non-current-bananas content set up their own bananas miniserver and serve the content they use in their game. This is especially reachable when the alternative repository is placed in the server info (although that doesn't fit in the packet anymore).

In any case, I fear content for which the metadata does not match the actually released content. This will ensure that the content will never show up as downloaded as well as bug reports in our tracker. This effectively means we have to support the alternative repositories, or at least figure out they used one and it is sending out 'invalid' content. Of course the user is likely not able to tell us which repositories he was using at the time, simply because it might be a random one from a server he is not aware of. Not to mention people saying: X was on bananas yesterday, but now it isn't; where has it gone?

But as I said, having some uncontrollable non-author party distribute Simuscape's, mb's and other people's content would be a definite win for the end users.

[kamnet]

It is always possible for somebody to do something nefarious if they willingly choose to do so, especially with open source software. What is preventing somebody from taking the current source code and modifying it with their own homemade BaNaNaS clone, or disabling BaNaNaS, and then using the 3rd party link to re-direct game players to their own web site where they offer everybody else's files?

[Supercheese]

It is always possible for somebody to do something nefarious if they willingly choose to do so, especially with open source software. What is preventing somebody from taking the current source code and modifying it with their own homemade BaNaNaS clone, or disabling BaNaNaS, and then using the 3rd party link to re-direct game players to their own web site where they offer everybody else's files?

Unofficial vs official.
Proposing that trunk OTTD be made to accept 3rd-party repositories at will is a request for official support.

[andythenorth]

Summarising, a case is being made that "OpenTTD should support non-Bananas content services which allow downloading directly in game"? Fair summary?

Arguing that seems a bit cart before horse. Let someone turn up with an alternative content service that can offer downloading from a central repo, doesn't flap (good uptime), and isn't a demonstrable source of support, legal or community hassles. This service could bundle a desktop client which handles search / install / upgrade of the grfs it provides, making the user experience more seamless. It could even require authentication and provide an account / subscription service.

If a reliable service like this emerges, then it becomes reasonable to consider whether OpenTTD should integrate with that service (answer might still be no).

[Transportman]

If OpenTTD will ever support alternatives for Bananas, I think the risk (in the sense of reaching players) of someone making a repository and then provides all those GRFs from Simuscape and other non-Bananas sources on that alternative is bigger than someone modifying the source code to provide an alternative service.

And who is then responsible if the maintainer of that service doesn't respond? The OpenTTD-devs? Are all those NewGRF-developers going through all kinds of legal trouble to get it removed? Or are they going to hide their work even further? Or just stop developing? The support for alternatives for Bananas will only know losers and no winners.

Adding a link to GRFCrawler is nice, but eis_os has announced his intentions a few times to eventually close the service down, nor is he able to transfer the code that runs the server to somebody else. It's nice that he's reconsidered his stance a couple of times now, but I don't think we can depend on that forever.

When eis_os eventually shut down the service, the commit should be reverted or the devs should make some kind of alternative.

[kamnet]

It is always possible for somebody to do something nefarious if they willingly choose to do so, especially with open source software. What is preventing somebody from taking the current source code and modifying it with their own homemade BaNaNaS clone, or disabling BaNaNaS, and then using the 3rd party link to re-direct game players to their own web site where they offer everybody else's files?

Unofficial vs official. Proposing that trunk OTTD be made to accept 3rd-party repositories at will is a request for official support.

My point was that if somebody wanted to do something bad, they can already do it without the cooperation of the devs, and the devs are already powerless to do anything against it. There's also nothing that stops anybody from forking the project and do with it what they wish, start promoting it in an effort to supersede OpenTTD, even as a for-profit game.

While the potential for wrong-doing exists, there's no precedent for doing so, and it's not because the devs keep an iron-clad grip on everything.

Summarising, a case is being made that "OpenTTD should support non-Bananas content services which allow downloading directly in game"? Fair summary? Arguing that seems a bit cart before horse.

Not quite. Who is going to work on it if there's no sign from the devs that they'll even consider it? That's why I put it forth as a suggestion and idea, not as a demand. If the devs were going to consider it and automatically include it, I think they'd have to establish some basic guidelines on how repositories operate and how they connect and interact with OpenTTD, BaNaNaS or other repositories. I think it would be more than fair to suggest that such repositories do not host/distribute third party files w/o the author's permission, or they might not just remove access from within the game, but openly block it if necessary.

And who is then responsible if the maintainer of that service doesn't respond? The OpenTTD-devs? Are all those NewGRF-developers going through all kinds of legal trouble to get it removed? Or are they going to hide their work even further? Or just stop developing? The support for alternatives for Bananas will only know losers and no winners.

Who is responsible now when somebody uploads unauthorized distributions to web sites or file sharing services? It occasionally happens, but it doesn't happen anywhere near often enough that it's a source of problems.

[andythenorth]

And who is then responsible if the maintainer of that service doesn't respond?

Legally, the service maintainer is responsible, and the newgrf author is responsible for defending their own copyright.

Past experience shows that it's relatively trivial to go through a DMCA takedown notice, at least for services hosted in EU / North American. Other territories, dunno.

So this kind of problem would legally be nothing to do with OpenTTD which is only providing a client to a third-party service, and not any hosting or transmission.

However I don't think players or newgrf authors would see it this way; dry legal arguments don't make people happy when they have problems.

Nor do I think OpenTTD devs would be comfortable just making the legal argument. In my experience, a large number of the devs feel very personally responsible for helping solve problems with the game, and would be unhappy about the existence of problems which they couldn't help with.

I'd also figure that OpenTTD would be pressured into running a blacklist for third-party services which are known bad (or claimed to be bad). This immediately creates a new set of technical and legal issues to deal with.

[peter1138]

but OpenTTD doesn't plug into GRFCrawler's search function

It does with a recent enough version.

By the way:

The content server is not HTTP. You'd need a VPS at least to host your own repository. There's quite a bit of infrastructure that you'd need to extract too.

It does not support authentication, so any repo would have to be public, so that pretty much means it's unsuitable for something like Simuscape-hosted GRFs.

OpenTTDs content-server client would need a rewrite to support multiple servers. Part of the protocol provides for unique 32-bit IDs (god forbid we host more than 4 billion GRFs) which would then not be unique across multiple servers.

So. Who will actually run their own content server? I've only seen "someone might want to" which isn't a good enough case.