Transport Tycoon Forums

Lord Aro: Please, don't change the status to "sources missing" of the repository files, because They won't be included in the package.

Maybe It could be interesting to have a status named "Released, but with sources missing". It would be interesting for sprites that doesn't have sources, but They have all zoom levels and masks.

There are some sprites that don't have sources, but They are released under GPL license.

maquinista wrote:Lord Aro: Please, don't change the status to "sources missing" of the repository files, because They won't be included in the package.

It's not like the option is merely there to pad the list of choices. It's intended to be used. If the package is missing sources, then "sources missing" is the correct status, overriding any other possible status. Whether entries under that status should make it into the stringent nightly build or not is a whole another topic of discussion.

Jupix wrote:

maquinista wrote:Lord Aro: Please, don't change the status to "sources missing" of the repository files, because They won't be included in the package.

It's not like the option is merely there to pad the list of choices. It's intended to be used. If the package is missing sources, then "sources missing" is the correct status, overriding any other possible status. Whether entries under that status should make it into the stringent nightly build or not is a whole another topic of discussion.

This means that a package without sources can't be included in the nightly build?

Only in the dev build, where they already are.

i've been going through the repository, and noticed that CryingCorvus' items were unlicensed.
So, i went through his posts, and found this:

CryingCorvus @ [url]http://www.tt-forums.net/viewtopic.php?p=766996#p766996[/url] wrote:I think I can share my sprites with "free license" becouse it takes some time for me to learn coding and this is difficult for me boecouse my english language is not that good.
I modeled the Varivars trucks of 2gn that are missing from the set.

About masks for company colour. I know now it needs to be 8bpp but i want to know if ttd has some own speciffic pallete that I need to import or it just need to be set to 8bpp (256clr)

It that good enough to assume all of his/her models are released under this 'free license'
also, what exactly is this 'free license'? Public domain, or as the post before suggests:

maquinista wrote: [snip]
I will ask the authors of the models if They can upload the blend files and release them under a free license (CC BY-SA, CC BY...)........

one of those...?

I free license could be GPL, but It's better if We try to connect with him.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software#Definition

By "free license" we should always mean GPLv2 basically. That's what we want to implement & release the replacement set under. Public domain is mostly an American legal concept and doesn't exist as such in a lot of countries, including mine. At the repo we've redefined "public domain" as the Creative Commons Zero license which is pretty close in spirit. Graphics licensing has been talked about in great length and I suggest you search for those threads, they're pretty informative.

As for CryingCorvus, I sent him a PM on licensing in April and so far it's unread. So, I wouldn't hold my breath. To be pedantic, in that post he releases only his sprites, not the sources which produced them, so we can't use that content in an official manner anyway. Unofficially, sprites can be distributed regardless of license...

shame...

also, i have sent pms to brupje and neob, even though i'm sure they've already been sent one (or more), for no reason other than i came across their graphics...

EDIT: do the [saw/lumber]mill sprites posted here count as sources? while not the blend files, they are pre-release...

Jupix wrote:By "free license" we should always mean GPLv2 basically. That's what we want to implement & release the replacement set under. Public domain is mostly an American legal concept and doesn't exist as such in a lot of countries, including mine.

While that's true, it's from my understanding no problem to take things released under CC-BY or being under public domain and put it into a repository which uses GPL v2. After all in this case GPL v2 only implies more restrictions than giving credits (and that isn't even implied by public domain).

Question about the coast files. What should i do with the source files, as they are to do with the coast and not the sea
As soon as GeekToo replies to my last pm i'll ask him to include them in the grf.
http://jupix.info/openttd/gfxdev-repo/i ... ile&id=248

(I'm assuming that if they get put into the grf you can delte them from the repository, but i'm probably wrong )

Lord Aro,

I think we can do two things:
Add the new coast sprites to the 32bpp_extra set, which would be redundant with the sprites on Jupix's repo,
OR
Remove all 32bpp sprites from the 32bpp_extra set, leaving only the newgrf, and create graphics sets on Jupix repo that comply in numbering with that newgrf.

I'm not too sure which option is the best.

Your other question: please leave my grass tiles on Jupix's repo, I think it is a general graphics repo, not only intended for graphics as included in the nightly packs, so I see no problem to have multiple grass sets.

Your other question: please leave my grass tiles on Jupix's repo, I think it is a general graphics repo, not only intended for graphics as included in the nightly packs, so I see no problem to have multiple grass sets.

This is correct as long as stuff isn't duped all over the place. Different implementations of a sprite, completely okay.

GeekToo wrote:Lord Aro,

I think we can do two things:
Add the new coast sprites to the 32bpp_extra set, which would be redundant with the sprites on Jupix's repo,
OR
Remove all 32bpp sprites from the 32bpp_extra set, leaving only the newgrf, and create graphics sets on Jupix repo that comply in numbering with that newgrf.

I'm not too sure which option is the best.

Well, traditionally the repo's hosted all the extras as well as non-extra NewGRFs. I'm not really sure what you guys host and track at the extras project page, so if you think you're receiving all the attention you need while the stuff is still also added to my repository, then that is what I'll recommend.

If you think having the stuff at my repository takes attention away from the actual project site, it doesn't really make sense to have them at both places.

Regardless, it'd make sense for even NewGRFs (and extras) to have sources available, for the benefit of tinkerers. Licensing requirements don't necessarily apply in those packages unless it's a BANANAS requirement.

GeekToo wrote: I think we can do two things:
Add the new coast sprites to the 32bpp_extra set, which would be redundant with the sprites on Jupix's repo,
OR
Remove all 32bpp sprites from the 32bpp_extra set, leaving only the newgrf, and create graphics sets on Jupix repo that comply in numbering with that newgrf.

I'm not too sure which option is the best.

I would say number 2, just because it's easier and more simple to have all the sprites on the repo

I have just added lots of source images to the farm
while not the blends, does this count as source files? can it be set to released?

Lord Aro wrote:I have just added lots of source images to the farm
while not the blends, does this count as source files? can it be set to released?

If They can't be included in the official package, I will release a unofficial package with all GPL graphics without sources.

I will try to find the sources of my graphics, but It could be a long search.
The silos is a Blend file with other farm buildings. The arrows was made in Inkscape, and modified with GIMP. The road block sign was done with Inkscape, and I have modified it with GIMP adding colours and noise. The airport fences are just a GIMP drawing, I will try to upload a XCF file.

good...

TO ALL ARTISTS:
In case you haven't guessed already, to actually license the graphics properly in GPL form and so include them in the megapacks, we need as many sources as possible
Upload to the repo ASAP
Thank you.

This file http://jupix.info/openttd/gfxdev-repo/i ... file&id=29 is marked as to be split up, but isn't it already?

look at the number of sprites in the file
I think it wants to be split up into more files - maybe groups of 4-5 buildings?

Yes, but the file I mentioned seems to be split up already, in 3 parts.

http://jupix.info/openttd/gfxdev-repo/i ... cat&cat=16

And of those parts, some buildings are already split off again in e.g. http://jupix.info/openttd/gfxdev-repo/i ... cat&cat=17.

If a splitoff is already present, I think it would be best to remove the sprites from the larger files.

well as long as all sprites are included, i guess you can delete the un-splitted-file