BSP Quake Editor - source code?

[frag.machine]

[revelator]

uh ... yup that would be neat

[goldenboy]

[Baker]

Assuming one of the first things you consider doing is grabbing some code from:

1) NetRadiant
2) Quark
3) Sure you haven't used Willem's ToeTag for OS X, but it is mighty nice (but the user-interface is unintuitive and depends on a mouse. Like not even a notebook touchpad can use it because you need mouse3)
4) QER
5) Tread

Won't the license file by file morph? I'm just saying. Unless you don't plan on leveraging existing code.

Project Assessment: You seem to like NetRadiant just fine or acceptably so. It is already multi plat in theory. But installing it and setting up for Quake isn't automatic. Although BSP is a nice editor .... have you weighed the time required to improve BSP versus make NetRadiant BSP2 Quake noob friendly with auto-setup?

I think the fact you've done a great deed here and facilitating the open sourcing of this editor is great. At the same time, converting Win32 to some multi plat stuff like Qt or whatever is likely to be a major pain and a potentially long duration project. That being said, this editor seems very liked by the existing users and maybe WINE can run it great.

[Baker]

BTW: Once you guys do have a site setup for this editor and please make a super-nooby package. There can be a "prominent Hey check out BSP Quake Editor first ..." thing on the Quake Adapter page. You would be shocked at the kind of traffic that page gets.

If this BSP Editor setup can be made super-noob friendly, open source > dead editor.

[andrewj]

[goldenboy]

Wine does run the editor, at least the version I tried (ViciouZ' I believe).

However a native Linux / OSX version would be great (probably using GTK like Radiant does).

You are right that it would be a pain in the ass to do that. I am only going to look at it as a hobby project - I work very effectively with Radiant and am unlikely to replace radiant with BSP personally. I am interested in it purely from the point of view that an open source editor similar to Worldcraft would be a good thing for the following reasons:

1. Evolution of the .map format is enabled.

2. Evolution of features is enabled.

3. Workflow in a larger team such as RMQ is potentially improved.

4. No bit rot.

I didn't really do this bit of research & communication for myself. That wasn't my main goal, I have a broader goal.

The license question: The 3-clause BSD license is listed as GPL-compatible here:

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html

I'm sure code that is under an incompatible license can either be relicensed for use here (contacting the authors) or rewritten ^^

Would anyone really want to use code from Quark, Toetag or Tread in this project? Just asking.

About newbie-friendly autosetup things.

I wrote a newbie tutorial for setting up Radiant. It is easy enough to do, you just download and install netradiant and download and install the Quake gamepack. Then you maybe change a few things in a text file, which I explain in the tutorial. That isn't hard at all. The main problem with newbies and Radiant seems to be the interface itself, in a similar way that lots of people don't like Gimp's interface.

Installing Radiant isn't inherently n00b-unfriendly.

Having said that, making Quake maps is inherently n00b-unfriendly. I know we disagree here. But making a Quake map that is worth playing (not just a box with an info_player_start in it) is HARD. Having a n00b-friendly install package means nothing if the process of learning how to map is 100 times harder than that. In a way, if you cannot even install Radiant (or BSP) as it is now, then I doubt you have the tenacity to make a full map.

I have thought about doing some video tutorials about Quake mapping (from scratch mapping). I might just do that, if my machine can handle the transcoding etc. I have to try it.

[Baker]

[Baker]

[andrewj]

[Baker]

Heh. I wasn't implying otherwise, but yeah that does sort of weird up the author's wishes doesn't it. Anyways, these are questions for the participants in the project so I shall now meander off ...

[And licensing is a boring topic ... ones involving the GPL are twice are boring if you've read 50 of them, hehe ... Baker distracts other people. Quickly leaves ... ]

[revelator]

added license file and an icculus repo would be great.
jeff tried a few builds but it crashes for him i suspect cpu optimization (was built for a core2) ill target a pure pentium from now on but sse builds wont work then (user wth those cpu's can compile it themself. also less error prone).

looks like this here.

[goldenboy]

Considering Yahn said we can basically do what we want with it, I guess if we put it under the 3-clause BSD license it doesn't matter too much if someone later imports GPL code and thereby "taints" it. The GPL is still a do-what-you-want license, although it is more political than the BSD license. But that's something we realistically have to live with.

We could try keeping the main repo BSD licensed though, which would mean any GPL code wouldn't be directly ported, just used as a clue.

Yeah, damn licenses. I think as long as we keep it open source and free, though, we respect Yahn's intention.

[revelator]

bsd license should be ok since its compatible with basically any other license out there including GPL.

ill upload my source + built executables for testing (im kinda interrested in finding out if it crashes anywhere else) the source has a C::B workspace.

http://code.google.com/p/realm/download ... z&can=2&q=

[revelator]

btw source allready makes use of GPL code (libpng jpeg and zlib) so i think it should be ok