Log for #openttd on 1st November 2020:
Times are UTC Toggle Colours
00:06:16  *** Gustavo6046 has quit IRC
00:09:52  *** Gustavo6046 has joined #openttd
00:17:13  *** WormnestAndroid has quit IRC
00:17:52  *** WormnestAndroid has joined #openttd
00:24:59  *** Gustavo6046 has quit IRC
00:25:57  *** Flygon has joined #openttd
00:26:45  *** Gustavo6046 has joined #openttd
01:05:12  *** Progman has quit IRC
01:25:41  <FLHerne> grfcodec does some truly INSANE things with va_lists
01:26:13  <FLHerne> There are call stacks five or so functions deep, passing the damn things around
01:27:07  <FLHerne> (in the process of reimplementing the stdlib in incredibly broken parody)
01:27:54  <FLHerne> Look at this and where it's used
01:28:07  <FLHerne> We're going to summon Cthulu by accident with this stuff
01:28:33  <FLHerne> (also, my compiler hates it)
01:31:49  <FLHerne> Oh god, myvsprintf recurses
01:53:10  <DorpsGek_III> [OpenTTD/grfcodec] FLHerne commented on pull request #9: Fix various issues with MinGW build
02:00:57  *** azubieta has left #openttd
02:11:49  <Eddi|zuHause> that's when you try to do "clever" things but vastly overestimate your cleverness
02:12:02  <Eddi|zuHause> (which is pretty much all the time)
02:14:22  *** iSoSyS has joined #openttd
02:16:43  <DorpsGek_III> [OpenTTD/grfcodec] glx22 commented on pull request #9: Fix various issues with MinGW build
02:40:05  *** iSoSyS has quit IRC
02:41:15  <DorpsGek_III> [OpenTTD/nml] glx22 commented on pull request #166: WIP: handle labels more readably
03:36:06  *** Gustavo6046 has quit IRC
03:44:55  *** Gustavo6046 has joined #openttd
03:54:09  *** D-HUND has joined #openttd
03:57:34  *** debdog has quit IRC
04:12:40  *** glx has quit IRC
05:28:00  *** snail_UES_ has quit IRC
06:13:03  *** nielsm has joined #openttd
08:21:27  *** WormnestAndroid has quit IRC
08:21:40  *** WormnestAndroid has joined #openttd
08:40:22  *** sla_ro|master has joined #openttd
08:45:18  *** Wolf01 has joined #openttd
08:45:46  <DorpsGek_III> [OpenTTD/nml] FLHerne commented on pull request #166: WIP: handle labels more readably
08:51:56  *** Progman has joined #openttd
09:05:52  *** longtomjr has joined #openttd
09:06:04  <Wolf01> Back to restoring tanks which andy destroyed
09:11:19  *** andythenorth has joined #openttd
09:19:52  *** jottyfan has joined #openttd
09:21:04  <andythenorth> yo
09:23:26  <longtomjr> o/
09:23:43  <longtomjr> Did you figure something out with the freighters yesterday?
09:44:51  *** frosch123 has joined #openttd
09:45:52  <frosch123> TrueBrain: it's ridiculous that "firs" is on that list, given how out-dated that page is. maybe we should redirect to andy's docs instead :p
09:48:51  <TrueBrain> pfff, means he should update the wiki :P
09:50:18  <frosch123> i like that "cheats" is top-8. but what is special about "maglev" to make it top-11?
09:50:31  <longtomjr> it is fast?
09:51:05  * andythenorth figured out there's lots of drawing to do :P
09:51:35  <longtomjr> Hehe, but are you going ahead with the existing design for the 2 large freighers?
09:51:35  <frosch123> andythenorth: when was firs 0.9 ?
09:51:42  <andythenorth> oof
09:52:24  <frosch123> because that top-30 wiki page starts with it being outdated, because firs 0.9 changed some things :)
09:52:53  <andythenorth>
09:53:16  <frosch123> coop bundles start with 1.3
09:53:18  <andythenorth> I think I wrote that note
09:53:28  <andythenorth> yes was me
09:54:02  <frosch123> nice that it was translated into polish this year :)
09:56:29  <andythenorth> it's a great world
09:57:20  <frosch123> TrueBrain: i think it's not worth installing any redirects :)
09:57:41  <TrueBrain> :)
09:59:54  <frosch123> bad tb, you broke the image on the firs page :p
10:00:07  <TrueBrain> how?
10:01:08  <TrueBrain> pretty sure it was always broken
10:01:13  <TrueBrain> |screenshot=
10:01:21  <TrueBrain> don't blame me for the incompetent of others :P
10:01:40  <frosch123> never mind. i jumped the gun :)
10:01:50  <TrueBrain> :D
10:02:28  <TrueBrain> still possible I broke the template btw :P
10:13:16  *** HerzogDeXtEr has joined #openttd
10:14:37  <andythenorth> hmm
10:14:40  <andythenorth> tanker ships
10:32:36  <TrueBrain> that moment that you move a lot of code around, and it all starts to make a lot more sense ... :D
11:15:54  *** iSoSyS has joined #openttd
11:18:25  <andythenorth> \o/
11:21:59  <andythenorth> oof
11:22:10  <andythenorth> so grfs can provide a url to their website
11:22:14  <andythenorth> but urls break
11:22:17  <andythenorth> hmm
11:23:00  <frosch123> ask google, maybe they install a redirect on their dns
11:27:23  <andythenorth>  I did consider just letting them break
11:27:30  <andythenorth> as that's the least effort
11:27:48  <andythenorth> in fact, it's already implemented
11:32:43  <Eddi|zuHause> two questions at that point: 1) how often does it break? and 2) is there a non-broken replacement easily available?
11:33:20  <Eddi|zuHause> (where "easily available" would be "latest version on bananas")
11:34:10  *** gelignite has joined #openttd
11:34:27  <andythenorth> 1) unknown, depends on coop bundles 2) yes
11:34:40  <andythenorth> except in cases like HEQS, FISH, Squid, which are unmaintained
11:39:05  <Eddi|zuHause> by "break" do you mean "currently unavailable" or "moved permanently"?
11:40:34  <andythenorth> "unsupported"
11:41:05  <andythenorth> my inclination is to file this under not-a-problem
11:41:12  <andythenorth> "things fall apart", it's natural
11:41:21  <Eddi|zuHause> i tend to agree
11:42:21  <andythenorth> that just leaves the slightly odd case of what to insert for dev releases
11:42:31  <andythenorth> for which the docs might not be published
11:42:35  * andythenorth wavey hands
11:42:50  <andythenorth> [the docs are no longer published by CI on every commit]
11:42:53  <andythenorth> manual process now
11:52:54  *** nielsm has quit IRC
12:18:34  <Eddi|zuHause> that makes no sense. it's either a dev version or a release
12:30:05  <DorpsGek_III> [OpenTTD/team] Predmann opened issue #72: [pl_PL] Translator access request
12:36:31  <Eddi|zuHause> i'd say that is a non-issue, only archive docs for release versions. dev version docs stay on "latest"
12:36:39  <Eddi|zuHause> whatever "latest" happens to be
12:48:45  <andythenorth> not sure how to reliably calculate "latest"
12:48:54  <andythenorth> probably not a hard problem, but eh
12:49:57  <andythenorth> the script to generate index pages is pretty crude
12:50:24  <andythenorth> maybe python parse module can do it
13:06:53  *** glx has joined #openttd
13:06:53  *** ChanServ sets mode: +v glx
13:27:24  <andythenorth> maybe I just conditionally drop the action 14 for url, if current rev is not a tag
13:27:42  <andythenorth> all public releases get a tag
13:27:49  <andythenorth> all tags get docs
13:30:53  <andythenorth> "git name-rev --name-only --tags HEAD" might be my friend
13:31:01  * andythenorth copies from Stack Overflow
13:31:39  <andythenorth> hmm comments say that fails in branches
13:34:28  * andythenorth will leave this to competent people
13:34:33  <andythenorth> pixels to draw here
13:49:03  <TrueBrain> w00p, namespaces are not modular units .. and we can simply add new ones if we like to add new features to our wiki :) :D
13:49:41  <TrueBrain> not = now, nasty typo
13:55:52  <frosch123> the reverse transformation of fragments is ambiguous, but well, i got something
13:56:38  <frosch123> slugify lower-cases everything?
13:57:18  <TrueBrain> slugify use python-slugify
13:57:20  <TrueBrain> :P
13:57:27  <TrueBrain> don't try it yourself pretty please :)
13:57:38  <frosch123> no, i am just reading the diff
13:58:05  <TrueBrain> ah, sorry, misunderstood what you said there :)
13:58:09  <TrueBrain> and yes, slugs should be lowercase
13:58:18  <TrueBrain> you can see around <hN> how the slug should look
14:02:17  <TrueBrain> hmm .. someone uploaded a scenario as an image ..
14:02:20  <TrueBrain> what are we going to do with that?
14:02:41  <frosch123> they just changed the extensio to .png? or what
14:02:53  *** andythenorth has quit IRC
14:02:55  <frosch123> tell me, i just add it to the perma trash list :)
14:02:57  <TrueBrain> nope, a scn
14:03:10  <TrueBrain> <- "Download this scenario"
14:03:21  <TrueBrain> <- IT IS PRETTY!
14:03:30  <TrueBrain> it is really stupid
14:03:44  <frosch123> it's alreasy in the trash list
14:03:59  <TrueBrain> Page/en/Community/Scenarios/Fractal Landscape.mediawiki
14:04:09  <TrueBrain> is the new link
14:05:34  <frosch123> yes, but the download is trashed
14:05:40  <TrueBrain> so ... we are going to remove the link?
14:06:01  <frosch123> we can also trash the whole page?
14:06:02  <TrueBrain> or remove the page? As without the download, the page is not useful either
14:06:09  <TrueBrain> I think that is the only sane thing to do tbh
14:06:13  <frosch123> ok, i'll remove the page then :)
14:06:18  <TrueBrain> cheers
14:07:39  <frosch123> i pushed the slugify result
14:08:10  <frosch123> well, now i did :)
14:10:05  *** Progman has quit IRC
14:11:58  <TrueBrain> and I fixed a lot more {{SERVER}} and others
14:12:02  <TrueBrain> so when-ever you feel like it, please bash the API again for a while :D
14:12:33  <TrueBrain> -  --><sup><tt>[[#note-{{{name|}}}-1|[1]]]</tt></sup></span><!--
14:12:33  <TrueBrain> +  --><sup><tt>[[#note-name-1|[1]]]</tt></sup></span><!--
14:12:37  <TrueBrain> found an issue with your latest push :)
14:12:55  <frosch123> wtf. template inside fragment? :p
14:13:00  <frosch123> who does that?
14:13:10  <TrueBrain> you really asking that? :P
14:13:30  <TrueBrain> I would just skip slugify if {{{ is found in hash, tbh
14:13:35  <frosch123> well, we won't fix that anyway. so this is not more broken than before
14:14:39  <frosch123> but okay, added the same  { check as for other things
14:14:48  <TrueBrain> and it works btw :D
14:14:54  <TrueBrain> the new hashes point to the right places
14:15:31  <frosch123> i also did some magic bytes:fromhex and decode("utf-8") :p
14:15:38  <frosch123> not sure whether it matters anywhere
14:15:54  <TrueBrain> urllib can decode it too for you :P
14:16:01  <TrueBrain> it is best effort ... :)
14:16:13  <frosch123> it's not percent encoded
14:16:22  <frosch123> it's dot encoded or something
14:16:29  <TrueBrain> owh, they used that silly encoding .. they replaced % with .
14:16:41  <TrueBrain> but reversing that is .. euhm .. yeah, what-ever
14:16:47  <frosch123> yes, but they did not escape ".", so it becomes ambiguous
14:17:05  <frosch123> ".C5" can mean two things
14:17:24  <TrueBrain> slugs are not meant to be reversed :P
14:17:29  <TrueBrain> but their slug is .. extra special :D
14:18:19  <TrueBrain> <- today I did a lot, but it didn't change anything :D
14:18:47  <frosch123> i see, adding some zerg
14:19:07  <frosch123> advancing to lair tech
14:19:12  <TrueBrain> :D
14:21:08  <TrueBrain> okay, what next ... I have a bunch of TODOs to fix
14:21:19  <TrueBrain> File namespace to implement ..
14:21:38  <TrueBrain> git commit + push
14:21:49  <TrueBrain> but otherwise I think we are getting feature-complete here ... I should make a list of things we need to do or something
14:24:17  <TrueBrain> owh, yes, caching of metadata .. and invalidating ..
14:24:17  <TrueBrain> that really has to be resolved :P
14:40:55  <DorpsGek_III> [OpenTTD/team] manu-alonso opened issue #73: [gl_ES] Translator access request
15:25:23  *** snail_UES_ has joined #openttd
15:32:28  <frosch123> damn, i hit a limit of wikitextparser :)
15:33:17  <frosch123> [[Image:Terminus.png|center|none|frame|Einfache Kopfbahnhöfe: der linke benutzt [[Signale/De#Blocksignale|Blocksignale]]  <- when i fix the center|none i invalidate the link in the caption
15:37:09  <FLHerne> TrueBrain: BaNaNaS doesn't compress downloads at all, does it?
15:37:17  <frosch123> let's add more parse/unparse :)
15:37:31  <frosch123> FLHerne: there should be http gz compression
15:37:39  <FLHerne> lzma or zstd compression of code-heavy grfs (e.g. FIRS) is pretty good
15:37:42  <frosch123> or some other kind of gz compression
15:38:03  <FLHerne> Only knocks about 25% off zBase though
15:38:10  <TrueBrain> FLHerne: how do you arrive at that conclusion?
15:38:15  <TrueBrain> (that it does not compress?)
15:38:33  <TrueBrain> frosch123: lol .. yeah, links in links took me a while to get right ..
15:38:37  <glx> compressed zBase is still huge anyway
15:38:42  <FLHerne> TrueBrain: That I've never heard anyone mention compression, nor seen the code for it :p
15:39:00  <FLHerne> That doesn't make me at all confident, hence the question...
15:39:01  <TrueBrain> empirical evidence! :D
15:40:23  <TrueBrain> FLHerne:
15:40:47  <TrueBrain> all files are stored and transmitted compressed
15:40:52  <TrueBrain> has been since day 1 btw :)
15:41:37  <TrueBrain> to match the other end
15:41:51  <TrueBrain> not sure about the "not seen the code for it".. sounds more like: never looked at the code :P :P :D
15:44:44  <TrueBrain> introduced in :) Funny :)
15:44:55  <TrueBrain> 11 years ago, damnnnnn
15:45:00  <TrueBrain> and I guess it is a compliment to the implementation that you never heard anyone mention it :)
15:45:03  <TrueBrain> as sturdy as a rock :P
15:45:37  <FLHerne> Okay, okay, you can stop beating me over the head with it now :p
15:45:37  <frosch123> best IT is the IT you never hear about :)
15:45:41  <FLHerne> And what frosch123 said
15:46:09  <TrueBrain> haha, sorry FLHerne , wasn't meant like that :)
15:46:09  <TrueBrain> I had to look it up too if it really was .. I assumed it was
15:46:17  <FLHerne> (the bad part is where it works so well that everyone forgets about it, and *then* it breaks for some reason...)
15:46:45  <TrueBrain> one could wonder if there are better compressions than gzip
15:46:47  <FLHerne> Modern compression algorithms do seem to improve on gzip somewhat
15:46:49  <FLHerne> ^^
15:46:51  <TrueBrain> but .. don't think it will matter too much
15:46:59  <glx> ha that looks like tar extraction of music packs
15:47:09  <TrueBrain> we used to do gzip -9, but it turned out it was only wasting CPU
15:47:48  <FLHerne> FIRS is 4.8M uncompressed, 772K with gzip, 584K with zstd
15:47:48  <TrueBrain> @calc 772 / 4800
15:47:48  <DorpsGek> TrueBrain: 0.160833333333
15:47:54  <TrueBrain> @calc 584 / 4800
15:47:54  <DorpsGek> TrueBrain: 0.121666666667
15:48:07  *** andythenorth has joined #openttd
15:48:09  <frosch123> didn't rb code some dynamic compression rate when sending savegames to joining players, that balances cpu time with how long it takes to send stuff?
15:48:15  <FLHerne> zBase is 313M (!) uncompressed, 274M with gzip, 223M with zstd
15:48:36  <glx> but old clients know gz only
15:48:36  <FLHerne> Doesn't compress nearly so well, I guess because it's mostly images...
15:48:49  <TrueBrain> main issue with a compression like zstd: not many tools support it yet .. and do they have a stable API by now?
15:48:50  <FLHerne> Yeah, but most people are on the latest client
15:49:14  <FLHerne> And the web download links don't even work, as discussed the other day :p
15:49:14  <glx> depends on distrib
15:49:24  <TrueBrain> the API was in flux for years .. which was rather annoying
15:49:46  <TrueBrain> anyway, FLHerne , the way forward would be: add zstd support in OpenTTD (also for savegames pretty please :P); which requires finding a decent library with the right license, I guess
15:50:04  <TrueBrain> after that, we can change BaNaNaS to store both formats
15:50:14  <TrueBrain> after that, a small change to the protocol to make it "zstd-aware"
15:50:20  <FLHerne> glx: You need current one for multiplayer and recent grf features, I think most non-very-casual players get the current version one way or another
15:50:47  <TrueBrain> OpenTTD is and always has been backwards compatible :)
15:50:53  <TrueBrain> it is not a lot of work to do that
15:51:03  <frosch123> did anyone report that the "download nightly" link on the wiki sidebar does not work? :p
15:51:52  * FLHerne puts it on the list of things that shouldn't be much work ;-)
15:51:52  <TrueBrain> adding it to OpenTTD client is the most work, honestly
15:51:52  <TrueBrain> owh, the content-protocol doesnt have a version number
15:51:52  <TrueBrain> that is silly
15:52:28  <TrueBrain> so it will have to be a new packet
15:52:29  <frosch123> TrueBrain: when ottd downloads via http, it sets the supported compression in the header?
15:52:29  <TrueBrain> but that really is minor effort
15:52:34  <TrueBrain> frosch123: the file being sent is a .tar.gz
15:52:56  <TrueBrain> so I hope it doesn't set compression headers
15:52:56  <TrueBrain> it really shouldn't :P
15:53:11  <TrueBrain> (as gzipping a gzip is not really a good use of CPU)
15:54:02  <TrueBrain> well, not having a version number for the content-protocol is a bit of a boo-boo .. we should have known by then that it will come in handy some day
15:54:02  <TrueBrain> owh well ..
15:55:12  <FLHerne> TrueBrain: It could be worse
15:55:36  <FLHerne> .deb packages contain a file that must contain only the number 9
15:55:46  <TrueBrain> for HTTP it is a matter of adding a query-string, for the TCP protocol it is adding a version number and changing the packet type .. together with adding support in bananas-api and bananas-server, it is like 2 or 3 days work
15:55:52  <FLHerne> For some reason, this number can't be either changed or removed
15:56:40  *** Flygon has quit IRC
15:57:02  <FLHerne> Ok
15:57:27  <TrueBrain> ugh, the Python modules still vendor zstd .. but at least their API seems to have stabilized
15:57:28  <FLHerne> But right now I'm trying to make NML string code slightly less stupid :p
15:57:33  <TrueBrain> I worked with zstd ... 4 years ago?
15:57:36  <TrueBrain> it was a nightmare :P
15:58:01  <TrueBrain> zstd headers were custom per tool .. which was another issue ... just a minor issue :P lol ..
15:58:03  <FLHerne> It seems fairly stable now, some distros are using it for package compression
15:58:08  <TrueBrain> good
15:58:15  <TrueBrain> as it really was better in compression and CPU usage
15:58:46  *** Progman has joined #openttd
15:59:02  <TrueBrain> frosch123: only host/user-agent is set, so pfew, it doesn't add extra overhead there :)
15:59:11  <TrueBrain> not really surprising, given OpenTTD doesn't use a http library
15:59:18  <TrueBrain> it is lovely .. "custom" :D
15:59:39  <TrueBrain> I was somewhat surprised it worked with the HTTP the AWS ALB spits out :P
16:00:02  <FLHerne> How about configurable content servers? Then the simuscape people can have their own...
16:00:14  <TrueBrain> what do you mean?
16:00:22  <TrueBrain> what you wrote could mean almost anything :P
16:01:32  <FLHerne> How about making it possible to add custom content-server URLs in the client, so people who don't like BaNaNaS for strange reasons can still have ingame-downloadable content?
16:01:54  <FLHerne> If they set up their own server instance
16:01:56  <TrueBrain> ah :D Sorry, I rather ask than guess and misunderstand :P
16:02:13  <FLHerne> The sticking point is probably that they wouldn't...
16:02:16  <TrueBrain> well, people can run their own content-servers; if they want people to use it, they can cook their own client :)
16:02:55  <frosch123> seriously... what is wrong with the polish translator?
16:02:59  <TrueBrain> it is one of the reasons I wanted to rewrite bananas and have it decoupled, so it could be on GitHub
16:03:00  <Eddi|zuHause> i think allowing people to host their own content servers is dangerous
16:03:06  <frosch123> they translated a "talk" page...
16:03:34  <TrueBrain> FLHerne: for example, I can see CityMania or Reddit to host their own, with their own client
16:03:38  <FLHerne> Perhaps they're a confused robot
16:03:40  <TrueBrain> so it has the downloads they use on their servers
16:04:15  <TrueBrain> but supporting a custom URL .. not sure anyone would ever use that, honestly :)
16:04:34  <Eddi|zuHause> TrueBrain: at best that leads to a more fractured community
16:04:50  <TrueBrain> I am more afraid for the license violations it leads to
16:05:21  <Eddi|zuHause> yes
16:05:49  <TrueBrain> anyway, I don't see simubla having the infra to run these kind of things honestly :)
16:06:11  <Eddi|zuHause> imho it would be better if we maintain a curated list of download servers, and if they want to be on that list they have to assure us that they respect licenses
16:06:12  <FLHerne> frosch123: When you said Action8 might not work with Unicode, did you mean the grfid, or were you thinking of something else?
16:06:26  <FLHerne> (because I can't find documentation of 'something else')
16:06:35  <TrueBrain> Eddi|zuHause: easier: official OpenTTD uses official infra, which we maintain
16:06:41  <frosch123> FLHerne: that was a wip comment. it works :)
16:06:43  <TrueBrain> if you want to use another content server, bake your own client :)
16:07:17  <FLHerne> frosch123: Ok, thanks :-)
16:07:17  <Eddi|zuHause> the two immediate uses of that would be a) a mirror of the coop grf pack with all the old grfs of people who won't upload to bananas, and b) a bananas-with-experimental-grfs
16:07:17  <TrueBrain> FLHerne: anyway, so the wishlist for content-service is: HTTPS support and zstd :D
16:07:32  <TrueBrain> I prefer HTTPS being done before zstd, if I can put any priority in there :)
16:08:15  <Eddi|zuHause> all the coop grfs are technically distributable, but they clash with the bananas requirement of being the author to upload them
16:08:42  <frosch123> Eddi|zuHause: just let the old stuff die
16:08:52  <FLHerne> Change the BaNaNaS policy?
16:08:59  <TrueBrain> I like that being part of the policy honestly :)
16:09:09  <TrueBrain> it avoids so many silly arguments
16:09:09  <FLHerne> frosch123: Then you get the occasional person with ancient savegames they can't find the grf for
16:09:13  <TrueBrain> "Are you the author? No? Byeeeeeeeeee"
16:09:31  <Eddi|zuHause> it's a perfectly fine policy for a "anyone can upload" server
16:10:22  <FLHerne> "You must be the creator, unless the creator has been inactive for at least five years" would avoid most conflicts
16:10:31  <TrueBrain> does it? :D
16:10:45  <FLHerne> Also, looking at the various FIRS clones, "the creator" can mean changing a handful of properties and the name :p
16:10:56  <TrueBrain> so many people misunderstand licenses or used the wrong one from their intent
16:11:11  <FLHerne> TrueBrain: Yeah, but if they've been inactive for years they'll never notice anyway
16:11:13  <Eddi|zuHause> FLHerne: nobody would be helped by that policy. the reason it is there is that it's easy to check for us
16:11:19  <TrueBrain> it is a nightmare if anyone can upload anything, because they -think- the license allows it
16:11:48  <FLHerne> So no complaints
16:11:57  <TrueBrain> FLHerne: well .. I am not sure about that :P
16:11:57  <TrueBrain> I suspect some people to come back from the death just to stab a bit more :P
16:11:57  <TrueBrain> anyway, it is a subjective term
16:12:02  <TrueBrain> and those are annoying in execution
16:12:06  <TrueBrain> the current terms are objective
16:12:07  <TrueBrain> you are either the author or not
16:12:24  <TrueBrain> it avoids burning developers out doing stupid shit like license conflicts :D
16:12:55  <TrueBrain> we had sufficient of those in 2009 honestly :P
16:12:55  <TrueBrain> And I am still annoyed by them :D
16:14:22  <TrueBrain> I couldn't believe then, and I still can believe now, how much a very small group was absolutely against their work being distributed
16:14:49  <TrueBrain> like .. we build this game for free for anyone to play, and your addition to it, should be heavily guarded and restricted in distribution ..
16:14:58  <TrueBrain> but that is me personally failing to understand :P
16:15:07  <FLHerne> On license technicalities, does bananas keep a copy of the source of GPL grfs?
16:15:14  <TrueBrain> it doesn't have to, so no
16:15:19  <FLHerne> If not, what happens if the original source host disappears?
16:15:32  <TrueBrain> we are not the license owner; we have no quarrel in that
16:16:26  <FLHerne> I don't see how that works
16:16:52  <FLHerne> Unless the uploader gives BaNaNaS a separate non-GPL license to distribute
16:17:05  <TrueBrain> they give us an explicit permission to distribute their work
16:17:07  <FLHerne> Which they might not be able to, if it's based on any code from another grf
16:17:25  <TrueBrain> (hence again that we want the author to upload the file; they can give us a license to distribute)
16:17:44  <andythenorth> did I miss something? :P
16:17:44  <TrueBrain> and from that point on, it doesn't really matter what the license is
16:17:54  <TrueBrain> it can be a commercial license, a CC-0, or anything in between
16:17:55  <FLHerne> But that means that if grf A is under GPL by someone else
16:18:16  <FLHerne> and I use code from that in my own grf B, under GPL terms
16:18:42  <FLHerne> I then can't upload B to bananas, because it would infringe the author of A's rights
16:19:06  <TrueBrain> very strictly seen, but let's please not make this world more complicated than it has to be, and these kind of questions always (and always) lead to there:
16:19:28  <TrueBrain> author of grf A can argue that the author of grf B did not have the permission to license it to us for distribution, and requests removal
16:19:35  <TrueBrain> we will always and always process these kind of requests
16:19:40  <TrueBrain> just ... nobody in his right mind does that
16:19:50  <TrueBrain> so it is more a hypothetical :)
16:20:08  <TrueBrain> we, as BaNaNaS redistribution platform, request that the author can give us a distribution license
16:20:08  <FLHerne> There's strong evidence that not all grf authors are in their right mind, so I'm not sure it's hypothetical :-/
16:20:15  <TrueBrain> if he does, and is not allowed to, that is a problem between the license owners
16:20:16  <Eddi|zuHause> i think we already established that nobody involved is in his right mind in the first place :p
16:20:39  <TrueBrain> it is a hypothetical, as nobody ever made any fuzz about this left or right
16:20:51  <TrueBrain> all issues we had so far, are from other problems
16:20:59  <andythenorth> does anyone but me actually have a lawyer? o_O
16:21:10  * andythenorth back to pixels
16:21:23  <TrueBrain> andythenorth: well, 11 years of people shitting over the licenses of BaNaNaS makes you read up on a lot of it :P
16:21:46  <FLHerne> I get to listen to my brother complaining about accounting technicalities a lot...
16:22:09  <frosch123> if bananas was agpl licensed, would that make all content distributed by it also agpl? :)
16:22:12  <TrueBrain> but anyway, left or right: we have done our due indigents to receive the proper license to distribute. Anyone who disagrees someone else gave us the license, can email us at :)
16:22:17  <TrueBrain> frosch123: no :)
16:22:18  <andythenorth> frosch123 'no'
16:22:22  <frosch123> aw :(
16:22:51  <TrueBrain> FLHerne: basically, this is what all distribution platforms do; otherwise you cannot distribute anything in this world
16:22:58  <TrueBrain> as people will fake their permission, sooner or later
16:23:20  <TrueBrain> we do our best with the information provided; if someone provides other information, we will investigate
16:23:28  <andythenorth> frosch123 did you think expanding buy menu padding for ships was viable?
16:23:39  <andythenorth> or shall I just put more blue around the sprite (with python)
16:23:53  <frosch123> andythenorth: i thought michi fixed it all
16:24:04  <andythenorth> not in 1.10.2
16:24:09  <andythenorth> maybe I missed something
16:24:18  <andythenorth> I stopped reading github notifications a few months ago
16:24:45  <frosch123> oh, i refering to a change that was 1.4 or 1.5 :p
16:25:45  <TrueBrain> FLHerne: what makes GPL difficult in those regards: if grf A from your scenario is published on BaNaNaS, it is difficult to argue grf B cannot be published there
16:26:17  <TrueBrain> one could argue that by the extend of the fact grf A is already under the distribution license, grf B has to be too
16:26:33  * andythenorth reads commits
16:26:52  <andythenorth> GPL is almost irrelevant
16:26:59  <TrueBrain> but when it comes to these details of licensing, country-of-origin kicks in
16:27:41  <andythenorth> no author of GPL program A can restrict what author of GPL program B (derived from program A) does
16:27:49  <TrueBrain> in general, I rather talk in the intent of a license .. what did the author wanted to achieve with it
16:27:51  <andythenorth> it's inherent to GPL
16:28:16  * andythenorth reading commits still
16:28:37  <andythenorth> did PRs outnumber issues yet?
16:28:43  <TrueBrain> CC tried to fix this, by having very clear rules of license .. but .. people found typos and mistakes in the text :P
16:28:43  * andythenorth stopped reading any of this stuff
16:29:12  <TrueBrain> (not really typos .. but typos in the intent)
16:30:02  <TrueBrain> andythenorth: well, sort of .. the author of program B has to show the source upon request ;)
16:30:13  <andythenorth> yes, granted that
16:30:19  <frosch123> shall i derail again? we had a dicussion whether playing a CC-ND licensed scenario cannot be played because the savegame is a derivate of the scenario :)
16:30:45  * andythenorth will go back to Horse
16:30:45  <andythenorth> too much of my life spent on licensing debates :)
16:30:45  <TrueBrain> frosch123: I would love to be able to pay a court to get a verdict on these things, really
16:30:48  <frosch123> andythenorth: trains more fun than ships?
16:30:49  <andythenorth> all fun has been exhausted
16:31:01  <andythenorth> trains faster to make than ships
16:31:01  <TrueBrain> as it is a really interesting case to debate about
16:31:01  <TrueBrain> and I am really curious what a judge rules there
16:31:04  <andythenorth> I made an engine in 20 minutes this morning
16:32:04  <andythenorth> fundamentally ships are less interesting than trains :P
16:32:04  <TrueBrain> I wonder mostly what the author would mean by licensing a scenario CC-ND
16:32:04  <andythenorth> they're all just big floating boxes
16:32:22  <TrueBrain> what does he want to prevent .. someone making a derivative of the scenario?
16:32:49  <TrueBrain> which brings us to, I guess, the most forgotten thing in debates about license: someone has to sue first .. so it fully depends on the original author an his intentions :)
16:32:49  <andythenorth> anyone want to provide some python that can figure out if current git rev has an annotated tag?
16:33:00  <andythenorth> true / false would be enough
16:33:16  <frosch123> TrueBrain: they probably want to prevent someone uploading a "better scenario"
16:33:26  <TrueBrain> so they will never sue for savegames :P
16:33:36  <frosch123> i love forks of X that are named "better X" :)
16:33:36  <andythenorth> Better FIRS
16:33:39  <andythenorth> Better Horse
16:33:42  <TrueBrain> but what is fun ... Scenario under CC-ND .. savegames under ???, someone finds an old savegame, makes it into a scenario .. now what?
16:33:56  <TrueBrain> he didn't know the original work was under a license
16:34:19  <TrueBrain> so should we license all our savegames created from a scenario?
16:34:19  <TrueBrain> or just all savegames? :D
16:34:25  <frosch123> TrueBrain: i am sure ottd is at fault. it should have properly inscribed the scenario origin into the savegame, and prevent conversion
16:34:48  <frosch123> ottd does not have enough drm featurs
16:34:48  <TrueBrain> and this is why I love living in The Netherlands .. "common sense" kicks in somewhere there
16:35:23  <TrueBrain> well, yeah, DRM is the result of people wanting to protect what they perceive as theirs no matter what
16:35:38  <glx> "common" is not common for some people ;)
16:35:38  <TrueBrain> (no judgement on if they are correct in that perception, btw)
16:35:55  <TrueBrain> glx: in The Netherlands they mostly find a nice way to balance that issue
16:36:01  <TrueBrain> to weed out the weirdos with their .. "special" world view :P
16:37:16  <TrueBrain> I think in the end, and I hope we do that right, with OpenTTD we try to be a good boy, while not over-complicating the world
16:37:40  <TrueBrain> yes, you can debate every single upload on BaNaNaS .. but in the end, 99% of the uploads are there because the author intended it to be there
16:37:46  <frosch123> TrueBrain: we only have that
16:38:00  <frosch123> also, yay, hobby lawyer talk :)
16:38:08  <glx> indeed there is not so many banned content on openttd
16:38:18  <glx> so it basically works
16:38:21  <TrueBrain> very few disputes, and we try to mediate as much as we can
16:38:31  <TrueBrain> sure you can find issues and loopholes ...
16:38:31  <TrueBrain> but are they really relevant?
16:38:41  <TrueBrain> as soon as someone sues ... we are all out of here
16:38:44  <TrueBrain> like ... I guess you won?
16:39:22  <TrueBrain> We did our best, we did our research, we tried to be good .. is the rest really relevant?
16:39:55  <TrueBrain> for the same reason we never send anyone an email (like ever) for any announcement, "because we have your email, and you never did an opt-out" or what-ever :P
16:39:55  <TrueBrain> we don't want to be "that guy" ..
16:40:33  <glx> opt-out is illegal here anyway IIRC
16:40:33  <TrueBrain> sssstttt
16:40:34  <TrueBrain> :P
16:40:45  <TrueBrain> but we did that before GDPR already ;)
16:41:18  <frosch123> aw... i thought we could use them for the ottd-monthly-subscription
16:41:18  <glx> yeah because it was the right thing to do from the begining
16:41:18  <andythenorth> also law isn't 0 and 1
16:41:18  <FLHerne> andythenorth: "<andythenorth> no author of GPL program A can restrict what author of GPL program B (derived from program A) does"  <- except that B must remain under the GPL
16:41:34  <FLHerne> And BaNaNaS uploads technically aren't
16:41:48  <TrueBrain> I think FLHerne  has some reading up to do :)
16:41:48  <andythenorth> yes, being under the GPL is entailed by "GPL program B" ;)
16:41:48  <andythenorth> clue is in the name :)
16:42:03  <FLHerne> s/remain under/not be distributed except under the terms of/
16:42:03  * andythenorth back to pixels
16:42:24  <glx> BaNaNaS can't know it's a derivative work anyway
16:42:36  <TrueBrain> in the end, everyone things they know the law of licensing ... but AGPL hasn't seen any court yet
16:42:42  <TrueBrain> nobody even knows it is a valid license, as a random example
16:42:44  <FLHerne> andythenorth: Right, but BaNaNaS demands a separate, non-GPL-compliant license from the author of B
16:42:53  <andythenorth> yes
16:42:56  <andythenorth> which they can grant
16:43:05  <andythenorth> I get the point
16:43:16  <andythenorth> but distribution isn't modification
16:43:17  <TrueBrain> things? thinks .. lol ..
16:43:42  <glx> and if A complains with simple proof, B is removed from BaNaNaS
16:43:45  <FLHerne> andythenorth: They can only grant it with the permission of A's author
16:44:08  <andythenorth> because they're not the author of the whole program?
16:44:08  <andythenorth> arguable
16:44:26  <andythenorth> so you think our bananas license is wrong?
16:44:45  <FLHerne> andythenorth: Because the BaNaNaS upload license allows unlimited redistribution without the source being provided
16:44:53  <andythenorth> doesn't matter
16:45:05  <FLHerne> Which isn't GPL-compatible, so it conflicts with the license of the code taken from A
16:45:25  <andythenorth> no
16:45:25  <TrueBrain> common misconception of GPL
16:45:30  <andythenorth> this is all covered in GPL FAQs, if you dig enough
16:45:33  <glx> A must provide source if asked, not BaNaNaS
16:46:02  <andythenorth> distribution is not modification
16:46:02  <andythenorth> I don't think that is a controversial assertion
16:48:25  <FLHerne> andythenorth: Ok, but I don't see how that applies to the GPL
16:48:36  <FLHerne> "You may convey a covered work in object code form under the terms of sections 4 and 5, provided that you also convey the machine-readable Corresponding Source under the terms of this License"
16:48:45  <andythenorth> or an offer
16:49:06  <FLHerne> Where 'convey' means "any kind of propagation that enables other parties to make or receive copies."
16:49:22  <FLHerne> andythenorth: Sure, but bananas doesn't make such an offer
16:49:50  <FLHerne> Unless I've badly misread the GPL, there's no exception from a source offer for distributing unmodified binaries
16:49:54  <andythenorth> you've misread the GPL
16:50:04  <andythenorth> we're not the authors
16:50:27  <FLHerne> "we're" being the bananas operators?
16:50:42  <FLHerne> No, you're distributors
16:51:14  <DorpsGek_III> [OpenTTD/team] SeveralCircles opened issue #74: [es_ES] Translator access request
16:51:27  <andythenorth> you're probably right
16:51:31  <FLHerne> GPL doesn't say "if you're the author of a modified version you must provide source"
16:51:31  <andythenorth> on balanace
16:51:47  <FLHerne> It says "if you distribute the binary version, you must provide source"
16:51:49  <frosch123> TrueBrain: pushed new stuff
16:51:54  <TrueBrain> frosch123: \o/
16:52:03  <andythenorth> oh TrueBrain you did allow this in the end :)
16:52:09  <andythenorth> not sure if it offends me or not
16:52:23  <TrueBrain> andythenorth: somewhat .. how it is presented in-game, it is less .. like that
16:52:28  <TrueBrain>
16:52:35  <TrueBrain> I am still waiting for someone to complain about that
16:52:39  <TrueBrain> would love to change both
16:53:59  <andythenorth> I suspect that all the grfs I've released are GPL violations
16:54:11  <andythenorth> oh dear
16:54:25  <frosch123> sue yourself!
16:54:27  <TrueBrain> "art should not be released under GPL licenses"
16:54:40  <andythenorth> nah it's not that
16:54:42  <glx> but there's code in newgrf
16:54:51  <glx> ;)
16:54:56  <andythenorth> there's no written offer to provide source, valid for 3 years, cost-controlled
16:55:00  <andythenorth> required by GPL
16:55:12  <frosch123> andythenorth: have you checked whether you use any trademarked colours in your sprites?
16:55:13  <andythenorth> ouch the lolz
16:55:27  <andythenorth> but seriously, none of my grfs have that written offer
16:55:53  <andythenorth> nor do I have any copyright agreement with contributors
16:55:53  <TrueBrain> andythenorth: relicense to v3, and done
16:55:53  <glx> there's probably a link to your github somewhere
16:55:53  <andythenorth> invalid
16:56:12  <TrueBrain> okay, more correct: request your contributors to agree with a relicense to v3 :P
16:56:47  <glx> (and good luck to the mental health of the people wanting to read it ;) )
16:57:14  <andythenorth> oh maybe 3C applies
16:57:44  <andythenorth> " Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer to distribute corresponding source code.  (This alternative is allowed only for noncommercial distribution and only if you received the program in object code or executable form with such an offer, in accord with Subsection b above.)"
16:57:55  <andythenorth> I suspect the GPL could have a bus driven through it TBH
16:58:15  <andythenorth> I've done a lot of commercial law in the last 20 years, and the GPL v2 looks quite naive now
16:58:21  <TrueBrain> haha, yes :)
16:58:24  <TrueBrain> but .. 1991? :P
16:58:24  <andythenorth> yup
16:58:28  <andythenorth> time and context
16:58:46  <TrueBrain> I still love that AGPL is a direct reaction of people violating the intend of the license.
16:59:38  <TrueBrain> like I said yesterday ... when is the Star-Trek era beginning? That we can all stop with this non-sense of "mine" and "yours"?
17:00:02  * andythenorth signs up to that newsletter
17:00:35  *** Wormnest has joined #openttd
17:00:46  <andythenorth> so if Github goes down tomorrow, any GPL offer I make is invalid
17:00:46  <andythenorth> lol
17:00:57  <TrueBrain> GPLv2, yes
17:00:59  <andythenorth> gotta love side effects
17:01:16  <TrueBrain> well, not perse btw
17:01:16  <TrueBrain> but the offer-part kicks in for sure
17:01:29  <TrueBrain> it is like .... if you want to be annoying, you can be annoying ;)
17:01:43  <andythenorth> so does anyone have wording for written offer for source?
17:02:04  <TrueBrain> I like how v3 found out it was an oopsie to say 3 years in v2 :P
17:02:13  <andythenorth> oh OpenTTD violates GPL also?
17:03:06  <TrueBrain> relicensing OpenTTD will be interesting :D
17:03:14  <andythenorth> I see no written offer to provide source in any docs
17:03:25  <TrueBrain> andythenorth: the GitHub link is kinda implying that :P
17:04:01  <Eddi|zuHause> you can't ever give a written order with a download
17:04:05  <andythenorth> not valid
17:04:05  <TrueBrain> and, also, it is given to you at download
17:04:09  <TrueBrain> so the "offer" part is not required ;)
17:04:17  <TrueBrain> the source and binary are distributed next to each other
17:05:03  <andythenorth> and if it's in your ports tree?
17:05:03  <andythenorth> they need to provide the offer there?
17:05:10  <andythenorth> their problem
17:05:10  <TrueBrain> deb vs deb-src, ofc
17:05:25  <andythenorth> ok so Bananas does need to make the written offer
17:05:26  <andythenorth> that's a fucker
17:05:54  <andythenorth> was I drawing trains?
17:06:27  <TrueBrain> frosch123: all {{SERVER, localurl and fullurl are gone \o/
17:06:28  <TrueBrain> w00p
17:06:48  <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth: no, ships
17:06:49  <frosch123> yep, not at 11k issues :)
17:06:49  <frosch123> *now
17:06:49  <TrueBrain> just a few references left
17:07:17  <TrueBrain> removing the "edit" thingy didn't work for all files, it seems
17:07:20  <TrueBrain> ah ... translations ..
17:07:33  <TrueBrain> [<span class="plainlinks">[ edit]</span>]
17:07:33  <TrueBrain> would you be so kind frosch123 ? :D
17:07:41  <andythenorth> how would we enforce the written offer?
17:07:50  <andythenorth> boring boring
17:07:56  <andythenorth> we don't mandate there has to be a readme etc
17:08:16  <Eddi|zuHause> let me reiterate: there is no way to provide a written offer with a download
17:09:35  <Eddi|zuHause> "written offer" implies being in physical form
17:09:35  <TrueBrain> that was how they meant it to be read in v2, yes :P
17:09:35  <andythenorth> ok well 3A is also out
17:09:36  <TrueBrain> in a different world :D
17:09:36  <andythenorth> "Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange;"
17:09:36  <frosch123> TrueBrain: pushed
17:09:36  <andythenorth> we're not going to distribute source with grfs
17:09:55  <TrueBrain> frosch123: [<span class="plainlinks">[ de progression du traqueur 32bpp/Fr&action=edit edit]</span>] :(
17:09:55  <TrueBrain> spaces ... underscores ...
17:10:00  <TrueBrain> maybe just regex the URL away
17:10:18  <andythenorth> but 3C requires 3B anyway
17:10:34  <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth: the only remotely practical way is to require GPL grfs to come with a link to the source
17:10:34  <TrueBrain> andythenorth: you were talking about OpenTTD, right? :)
17:10:34  <andythenorth> back to grfs
17:10:54  <andythenorth> in the absence of source, the author must have complied with B, a written offer
17:10:54  <andythenorth> they have no choice
17:11:06  <andythenorth> author can't fall back on C, only distributors can use C
17:11:15  <TrueBrain> for BaNaNaS the license is irrelevant .. you can like that or not, but at upload you give us a license to distribute
17:11:26  <andythenorth> I thought that
17:11:31  <TrueBrain> so it becomes either dual-licensed with GPL, or the author is in violation of his own license
17:11:44  <andythenorth> but we're distributing GPL artefacts
17:11:45  <andythenorth> we can't wavey hands a dual license
17:12:15  <andythenorth> v2 FAQS are really clear
17:12:15  <TrueBrain> you can dual-license GPL just fine :)
17:12:15  <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth: if there ever is a complaint about GPL violation, the grf is removed from bananas
17:12:15  <andythenorth> only your own contributions
17:12:15  <TrueBrain> it might not be valid in court .. but is that our problem?
17:12:22  <andythenorth> you can't dual-licenses 3rd party GPL code
17:12:50  <TrueBrain> what I do agree with, and what we talked about before: we should be more clear what the license means for uploads
17:12:50  <TrueBrain> as people are just clicking what-ever
17:12:50  <andythenorth> so we need authors to provide a written offer
17:12:50  <andythenorth> and we have to convey that written offer
17:12:50  <andythenorth> what a fucker
17:12:50  <TrueBrain> andythenorth: we, do not
17:13:16  <TrueBrain> we ask if you are the author
17:13:16  <TrueBrain> if you use code of which you are not the author .. it becomes out of our scope
17:13:16  <TrueBrain> we cannot defend the world against license violations
17:13:16  <TrueBrain> as that would mean we cannot operate
17:13:16  <andythenorth> the GPL disagrees
17:13:18  <TrueBrain> there is a balance
17:13:29  <TrueBrain> again, you are pointing the wrong finger :)
17:13:47  <andythenorth> well I just read the FAQs
17:13:47  <TrueBrain> basically, in a very bold statements: I don't care under what you license your shit
17:13:47  <TrueBrain> if you upload to BaNaNaS, you license us to distribute
17:13:47  <TrueBrain> if that license is valid or not .. that is not OUR problem
17:13:48  <TrueBrain> but YOUR problem
17:14:03  <TrueBrain> as "Custom" licenses would otherwise be impossible
17:14:17  <andythenorth> I want to agree
17:14:17  <andythenorth> and draw a train
17:14:19  <andythenorth> bu FLHerne is correct
17:14:35  <TrueBrain> so if GPL doesn't allow dual-licensing ...
17:14:35  <andythenorth> the GPL is infectious by design
17:14:51  <TrueBrain> best we can do is advise people not to use GPL (for art, that is always a good idea)
17:15:02  <TrueBrain> but we are back to that we should improve the license selection box :)
17:15:22  <andythenorth> we should ban GPL
17:15:23  <andythenorth> " For example, if you distribute copies of such a program, whether gratis or for a fee, you must give the recipients all the rights that you have.  You must make sure that they, too, receive or can get the source code."
17:15:31  <andythenorth> we have no way to deliver that
17:15:42  <TrueBrain> again, we have nothing to do with the GPL license :)
17:15:52  <TrueBrain> and I know that sounds childish, but it is what is happening
17:16:10  <andythenorth> I don't see how you sustain that argument factually
17:16:11  <FLHerne> TrueBrain: Yeah, but it basically prohibits (pedantic) grf authors from taking advantage of the GPL
17:16:44  <TrueBrain> andythenorth: I don't see how it is not?
17:16:44  <andythenorth> We're distributing.
17:16:44  <TrueBrain> they give us a license
17:16:45  <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth: the sustain part is basically: "it's fine as long as nobody complains"
17:16:45  <andythenorth> I thought we weren't, we were just providing a platform for authors to distribute.
17:17:01  <andythenorth> but it seems we are
17:17:01  <FLHerne> andythenorth: BaNaNaS distributes under the terms of a separate license granted by uploaders
17:17:01  <TrueBrain> of course we distribute; that is why we wanted a distribution license andythenorth  :)
17:17:18  <TrueBrain> the question you are debating: can you dual license GPL
17:17:18  <FLHerne> The problem is that most GPL uploaders technically can't grant it
17:17:22  <TrueBrain> I dunno .. that is not my problem (in a very childish way)
17:17:30  <FLHerne> TrueBrain: You can dual-license GPL, but only if you wrote all of it
17:17:35  <FLHerne> (or get agreement from the other people)
17:17:39  <TrueBrain> so there you have it
17:17:46  <FLHerne> You can't if it uses someone else's GPL code at all
17:17:46  <TrueBrain> we cannot be the police over licensing
17:17:54  <TrueBrain> that would make any distribution platform non-existent
17:18:00  <FLHerne> Which is the point of GPL
17:18:06  <TrueBrain> we do our best to tell people to make sure they can give us the license
17:18:12  <andythenorth> how silly it all is
17:18:14  <TrueBrain> but in the end, the author is responsible for providing the correct information
17:18:30  <TrueBrain> but again, we can improve by giving better information to the uploader
17:18:39  <TrueBrain> informing him of what choice to make
17:18:54  <andythenorth> strictly I need to request removal of all my grfs on bananas
17:18:54  <andythenorth> and every derivative grf that has been forked from them
17:18:54  <TrueBrain> just email
17:19:06  <andythenorth> yeah, I'll put it on my to-do list
17:19:33  <andythenorth> near the top, or bottom, do you think?
17:19:33  <TrueBrain> and the law in most countries are pretty clear on this btw
17:19:33  <TrueBrain> as distributor, you need to do your best to ensure the law isn't broken
17:19:44  <TrueBrain> but you cannot be responsible for people not giving the right information to you
17:20:14  <TrueBrain> and in my opinion, we do our best to ensure what we do is legal ... with the exception that would could educate people better on the license part
17:20:29  <andythenorth> well we need to remove GPL from the options
17:20:33  <andythenorth> it's a hole in our argument
17:20:54  <TrueBrain> and to be clear: nowhere I debate the GPL license; I debate that we have our own license
17:20:54  <andythenorth> we can't say 'dual-licensed but you can pick GPL'
17:20:54  <TrueBrain> no; you can distribute under GPL file
17:20:54  <TrueBrain> as long as you are the FULL author of the upload
17:21:03  <andythenorth> no we can't
17:21:11  <TrueBrain> you can dual-license GPL, I was just told?
17:21:15  <andythenorth> you can
17:21:27  <andythenorth> but we are presenting content as GPL-licensed, we should stop that
17:21:36  <andythenorth> we don't comply with GPL
17:21:49  <andythenorth> that angry Russian dude was correct it seems
17:21:50  <TrueBrain> you do know you don't have to tell anyone how often and how you licensed your software, right?
17:21:50  *** nielsm has joined #openttd
17:22:49  <TrueBrain> so I can license something GPL, and have some commercial licenses on the side too
17:22:49  <andythenorth> it's right here in the table 'license'
17:22:49  <andythenorth>
17:22:49  <TrueBrain> so I don't see your argument here?
17:22:49  <andythenorth> we don't meet the requirements for distributing GPL v2
17:22:49  <TrueBrain> yes ... the fact that something has a license .. how does that mean other people cannot have different licenses with that?
17:22:49  <andythenorth> if we want to distribute GPL v2 we have to comply with GPL v2
17:22:56  <TrueBrain> again debating the GPL license .. we are not debating the GPL license :)
17:23:19  <TrueBrain> can you dual license with GPL v2?
17:23:19  <andythenorth> yes of course
17:23:37  <TrueBrain> does an uploader give us such license on upload?
17:23:44  <andythenorth> no, they cannot give us a dual license
17:23:56  <FLHerne> andythenorth: Your argument is wrong, I think
17:23:56  <TrueBrain> you ... just said they can?
17:23:56  <andythenorth> they give us the alternate non-GPL license
17:24:07  <andythenorth> we do not comply with GPL v2, we cannot distribute under it
17:24:10  <TrueBrain> I am not trying to comply with GPL
17:24:15  <FLHerne> andythenorth: The alternate non-GPL license allows bananas to distribute under GPL if it wants to
17:24:15  <TrueBrain> we are not distributing under GPL
17:24:21  <andythenorth> yes we are
17:24:47  <FLHerne> But it doesn't
17:24:47  <andythenorth> it's right here
17:24:47  <TrueBrain> that is a misunderstanding on your part what that "license" means
17:24:48  <TrueBrain> it is NOT the distribution license we got
17:24:50  <TrueBrain> as that is between the author and us
17:25:04  <FLHerne> andythenorth: BaNaNaS lets clients download grfs unconditionally
17:25:11  <TrueBrain> we can, if you like, add to the page an *, stating: OpenTTD is granted a distribution license by the author
17:25:34  <TrueBrain> does that help? (as it is implied)
17:25:34  <andythenorth> no
17:25:34  <andythenorth> we need to stop distributing GPL v2 content, or comply with GPL v2
17:25:36  <andythenorth> one or the other
17:25:36  <FLHerne> Then *they* can distribute under the terms given in the GPL, but they can't really because they don't have the source
17:25:38  <TrueBrain> we are not trying to comply with GPL v2 :)
17:25:41  <TrueBrain> we are going in circles here :P
17:25:57  <andythenorth> we are distributing GPL v2, we have no choice but to comply :)
17:26:09  <FLHerne> andythenorth: No?
17:26:09  <andythenorth> it's not an opt-in, only if we feel like it
17:26:09  <TrueBrain> that is only true if dual-licensing doesn't exist :)
17:26:35  <FLHerne> andythenorth: BaNaNaS gets a license from the uploader to distribute it in any form, regardless of GPL restrictions
17:26:46  <andythenorth> there isn't like a magic condom that makes it GPL v2 when author compiles it, then something else when we distribute it, then GPL v2 again when they download it
17:27:04  <andythenorth> I thought we escaped it because we are only providing the service to authors, but seems not
17:27:06  <FLHerne> andythenorth: The issue is that the uploader can't grant that license in many cases, but that's not BaNaNaS' problem
17:27:17  <andythenorth> FLHerne that's a different issue
17:27:17  <FLHerne> (except perhaps in a 'providing a useful service' way)
17:27:27  <TrueBrain> FLHerne: on that point I btw see what you mean; I really would like a court-ruling on that, but I get that point
17:27:39  <FLHerne> andythenorth: Then I don't see what yours is
17:27:48  <Wolf01> lol
17:28:07  <andythenorth> I pasted above, straight from GPL v2
17:28:11  <andythenorth> "For example, if you distribute copies of such a program, whether gratis or for a fee, you must give the recipients all the rights that you have.  You must make sure that they, too, receive or can get the source code."
17:28:14  <TrueBrain> andythenorth: if what you say is true, you cannot dual-license GPLv2 :)
17:28:15  <FLHerne> andythenorth: If you write code, and release it under GPLv2, that doesn't prevent you from also selling it commercially or giving it to BaNaNaS
17:28:26  <andythenorth> TrueBrain of course you can dual-license it :)
17:28:32  <FLHerne> andythenorth: You aren't bound by the license because it's your code
17:28:35  <andythenorth> yes
17:28:36  <andythenorth> agreed
17:28:37  <TrueBrain> andythenorth: there is a contradiction in what you say :)
17:28:57  <andythenorth> but we aren't distributing it under an alternative license
17:28:57  <FLHerne> And BaNaNaS isn't bound by the GPL license because you gave it a separate one
17:28:57  <andythenorth> we are distributing it under GPL v2
17:29:16  <TrueBrain> andythenorth: there you are wrong; we are distributing under the license we hav efrom the author
17:29:26  <TrueBrain> what you mistake it with, is that that license is not transferable to the downloader
17:29:31  <andythenorth> this is so boring, can't we just call it a service to authors?
17:29:40  <TrueBrain> under that argument: I download a game from Epic, they have a download license, so now I do too?
17:29:56  <TrueBrain> a license is between 2 parties, right?
17:30:03  <TrueBrain> the license the author gives to its public, is GPLv2
17:30:09  <TrueBrain> the license they gave us, is: you can distribute this
17:30:25  <TrueBrain> a license doesn't have to be transferable
17:30:29  <andythenorth> we cannot distribute GPL v2 licensed programs without complying with GPL v2
17:30:41  <Eddi|zuHause> but we can
17:30:41  <andythenorth> it literally means we cannot cause the 1s and 0s to be conveyed
17:30:48  <FLHerne> ...and the license BaNaNaS gives its downloaders in that case is also 'GPL v2', but separately
17:31:03  <FLHerne> andythenorth: Your argument makes no sense
17:31:09  <TrueBrain> andythenorth: the AUTHOR cannot give us a license for distrubtion without complying to GPLv2 .. so HE has to take care of source distribution
17:31:13  <TrueBrain> HE has to make sure the link points to the source
17:31:21  <Eddi|zuHause> we distribute it with the bananas license, additionally, the user gets to redistribute it with gpl
17:31:25  <andythenorth> how many times do you want me to paste the GPL v2 text?
17:31:31  <TrueBrain> and again,I agree we can help this more, by adding something like: you selected GPL, make sure you link to your source!
17:31:40  <andythenorth> yes
17:31:43  <FLHerne> andythenorth: BaNaNaS' distribution isn't covered by the GPL
17:31:51  <andythenorth> FLHerne it is
17:31:53  <FLHerne> It isn't relevant
17:32:08  <andythenorth> the GPL entirely disagrees
17:32:10  <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth: it really is not
17:32:12  <TrueBrain> andythenorth: what you state makes dual-licensing impossible; proof me wrong? (maybe that helps us understand what you are saying)
17:32:21  <andythenorth> FLHerne we seem to have entirely switched positions, you pointed me to this :P
17:32:33  <FLHerne> andythenorth: BaNaNaS distribution is covered by
17:32:41  <FLHerne> "You grant the OpenTTD team the rights to distribute the last version of your content from a central server. We will assign a globally unique identifier to each upload and everyone can download the content when they know that identifier."
17:32:50  <andythenorth> Yes
17:32:52  <FLHerne> "You grant the OpenTTD team to distribute your latest content via our website."
17:32:54  <FLHerne> etc
17:33:03  <TrueBrain> it is a very custom and specific license :P
17:33:06  <LordAro> oh heavens, this is still going on
17:33:06  <andythenorth> how many of you use Bananas for upload?
17:33:19  <andythenorth> when uploading, one has to choose a license
17:33:35  <FLHerne> andythenorth: The chosen license is the one given to downloaders by BaNaNaS
17:33:38  <TrueBrain> mind you, this is the license you grant our downloaders
17:33:41  <andythenorth> one of the options is GPL v2
17:33:51  <FLHerne> Not the one used by BaNaNaS for distribution
17:34:03  <DorpsGek_III> [OpenTTD/grfcodec] LordAro updated pull request #9: Fix various issues with MinGW build
17:34:09  <andythenorth> it's GPL v2 program, the GPL v2 applies
17:34:19  <andythenorth> this is so simple, I am not sure how to make it simpler
17:34:21  <TrueBrain> andythenorth: lets pick another example: you download a Game. Steam, for example, has a distribution license, right? But the license of the game is DONOTDISTRUBTE
17:34:24  <TrueBrain> so how does that work?
17:35:00  <andythenorth> presumably a contract between rights holder and Steam, which permits that specific distribution
17:35:05  <TrueBrain> and again, nobody is debating the author has to comply with GPLv2 .. so he has to make sure he has a link to the source there
17:35:22  <andythenorth> it's all very silly
17:35:22  <TrueBrain> but .. by your own logic: how can they put a more strict license on the website?
17:35:24  <TrueBrain> as clearly it cannot be that strict, as I can download it?
17:35:33  <andythenorth> for the Steam case?
17:35:45  <TrueBrain> yes
17:35:46  <FLHerne> andythenorth: Right, and this is analogous to the terms of service between the rights-holder and BaNaNaS
17:35:46  <andythenorth> the rights hold licenses the distributor
17:35:58  <andythenorth> rights holder *
17:36:14  <Eddi|zuHause> how is that any different from bananas?
17:36:18  <FLHerne> You can upload a grf to BaNaNaS with a "do not distribute ever for any reason" custom license
17:36:45  <TrueBrain> that would be way more strict than GPLv2 :P
17:36:45  <Eddi|zuHause> you as uploader agree to be the rights holder, and you agree to the bananas license that is in the TOS
17:36:45  <FLHerne> It doesn't prevent BaNaNaS from distributing it, because you agreed to the ToS when you uploaded
17:36:45  <andythenorth> Eddi|zuHause the hypothetical Steam license is not GPL v2
17:36:51  <andythenorth> GPL v2 is viral by design
17:36:51  <TrueBrain> so GPLv2 is magic? It overrules other licenses?
17:37:05  <FLHerne> andythenorth: It's only viral if you didn't write the original code
17:37:05  <TrueBrain> so, I come back to my counter-argument: by your statement, dual licensing GPLv2 is impossible
17:37:23  <andythenorth> no it's viral for any distribution
17:37:23  <frosch123> FLHerne: i think pikka uses that license
17:37:23  <FLHerne> andythenorth: If you're the sole rights-holder, you can do whatever the hell you like with it
17:37:27  <TrueBrain> it either cannot be dual licensed, or what we do is valid
17:37:27  <FLHerne> It's your code
17:37:44  <TrueBrain> I can see your point andythenorth , but that means it cannot be dual licensed
17:37:44  <TrueBrain> if that is true, you are absolutely right
17:37:44  <andythenorth> before I re-read the FAQs, I was 100% convinced that distributing e.g. like Github binaries or whatever didn't touch the GPL v2
17:37:50  <FLHerne> TrueBrain: It's 100% not true
17:38:05  <andythenorth> FLHerne please
17:38:05  <andythenorth> ""For example, if you distribute copies of such a program, whether gratis or for a fee, you must give the recipients all the rights that you have.  You must make sure that they, too, receive or can get the source code.""
17:38:21  <andythenorth> what's not clear in the GPL v2 there?
17:38:22  <TrueBrain> this is the part I am missing in andythenorth's argument .. he says it can be dual licensed, but you cannot violate GPLv2 no matter what
17:38:22  <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth: but that virality is backwards. gpl says you cannot forbid anyone to redistribute it, you still can add additional distribution ways
17:38:22  <FLHerne> andythenorth: Nothing, but the author isn't bound by their own license
17:38:57  <FLHerne> andythenorth: And they can nominate anyone else to not be bound by their own license either
17:38:57  <andythenorth> anyway law operates on remedies
17:39:02  <andythenorth> so a remedy is to remove the GPL v2 option from Bananas upload form
17:39:06  <TrueBrain> anyway, although it is a nice academic approach to this all, I think we can all agree we can help authors a bit more, by pointing out what they should and shouldn't be doing
17:39:14  <TrueBrain> and we can simply add: you selected GPLv2, please also provide a link to your source
17:39:14  <andythenorth> another remedy is to require an offer for the source
17:39:31  <TrueBrain> as it is the intend of the license
17:39:32  <andythenorth> I really thought this was different
17:39:39  <FLHerne> andythenorth: If you say "I put this in the public domain and you can use it for any reason, but you can also use it under GPLv2", no-one is bound by that
17:39:50  <TrueBrain> andythenorth: yeah, we still do :P And your arguments are not seen as valid ;) So maybe some dinner might help there :)
17:40:16  <milek7_> but GPL text only applies when it is distributed under GPL, so if you use different license that you got, you don't need to look at GPL at all
17:40:16  <Eddi|zuHause> TrueBrain: yes, if you select gpl, it should require you to provide a link to source
17:40:31  <andythenorth> I thought we were just providing an information society service, and the author was the distributor
17:40:31  <TrueBrain> in general, we should tell a bit more what those licenses mean
17:40:31  <andythenorth> but as we have a 'distribution license'
17:40:31  <andythenorth> that doesn't hold up
17:40:31  <TrueBrain> yeah, that setup won't work andythenorth
17:40:35  <TrueBrain> we are distributing
17:40:46  <TrueBrain> we are storing
17:40:46  <TrueBrain> we NEED a distribution license to operate
17:41:07  <TrueBrain> but again, in your reasoning, I can make a custom license that also won't work
17:41:07  <Eddi|zuHause> TrueBrain: with a clarification that it should be a link to the static version that you upload, not a moving development target
17:41:07  <TrueBrain> so there is a crack in your logic andythenorth  :)
17:41:20  <andythenorth> I think that 'we need to be a distributor' could be argued differently, but I'm not super interested in trying to prove it :P
17:41:44  <FLHerne> andythenorth: The alternative would be to make BaNaNaS a big pile of redirect links to other people's websites
17:42:12  <FLHerne> Which would have interesting security problems
17:42:12  <FLHerne> And break the available-forever promise
17:42:15  <andythenorth> it's the available-forever that makes us a distributor
17:42:23  <TrueBrain> from what you say andythenorth , you deduce that because it is GPLv2, that license is the only license that also holds for us as distribution provider .. I argue: we are given another license that does allow to "break" GPLv2, by the copyright holder
17:42:23  <TrueBrain> this is, as far as I am aware, fully allowed
17:42:43  <FLHerne> Yeah
17:42:47  <Eddi|zuHause> i agree
17:42:52  <FLHerne> The issue is *only* when the uploader isn't the sole copyright holder
17:42:59  <andythenorth> no that's moot for us
17:43:01  <TrueBrain> but, the argument FLHerne  started: are most authors aware they have to own EVERYTHING
17:43:11  <andythenorth> I wasn't
17:43:18  <TrueBrain> it is our duty to inform them of such, in my opinion
17:43:26  <andythenorth> I have been relying entirely on GPL v2
17:43:34  <TrueBrain> but we are not by law
17:43:35  <FLHerne> TrueBrain: It would be slightly better to fix it, really :-)
17:43:59  <FLHerne> Not legally, but from the perspective of being a convenient distribution platform
17:44:04  <TrueBrain> but reworking the license dropdown has been on my wishlist for a while now
17:44:21  <TrueBrain> as having the GPLv2 as first entry ... not the best move we made
17:44:54  <FLHerne> If the upload thingy required a source tarball for GPL uploads, it would be good
17:44:55  <andythenorth> it would in some cases be huge
17:44:55  <FLHerne> TrueBrain: GPLv2 is great for grf code
17:44:55  <TrueBrain> andythenorth: but you didn't explain to us why the GPLv2 license would win over our custom license?
17:44:55  <andythenorth> and would be a nice vector for malware
17:44:55  <FLHerne> Also, there's so much already under it
17:45:15  <FLHerne> Using a different license by default would divide the ecosystem
17:45:19  <TrueBrain> FLHerne: source tarballs, hmm .. I rather have the authors made aware they should link it
17:45:28  <TrueBrain> as ingame you cannot download the source tarball
17:45:28  <TrueBrain> so it should be in their README etc
17:45:28  <andythenorth> FLHerne strictly most of those licenses are probably invalid
17:45:31  <andythenorth> so it's likely moot
17:45:53  <andythenorth> all of my GPL v2 licenses are invalid I _think_
17:45:53  <FLHerne> TrueBrain: If the author is the sole rights-holder, they don't need to link it
17:45:53  <TrueBrain> FLHerne: problem currently is that people picked GPLv2 because it was the top pick
17:45:53  <TrueBrain> we need some UX to avoid that
17:45:57  <milek7_> maybe to simplify things, it would make sense to remove license selection from bananas altogether? they can provide appropriate gpl/whatever license in archive itself
17:47:10  <FLHerne> TrueBrain: It renders GPLv2 pointless if they don't, but that's not a legal issue
17:47:10  <andythenorth> milek7_ that's an interesting idea
17:47:10  <TrueBrain> milek7_: yes, that works too; it just means a lot of people will distribute WITHOUT license .. which is worse
17:47:10  <FLHerne> TrueBrain: If the author *isn't* the sole rights-holder, which is true for most GPLv2 projects because code-sharing is the whole point...
17:47:10  <andythenorth> TrueBrain not sure how to show that GPL v2 'wins over'
17:47:14  <TrueBrain> hence making the link mandatory is correct for 90% of the cases FLHerne  :)
17:47:14  <FLHerne> TrueBrain: Then it doesn't matter whether the author distributes it, because they can't agree to the current BaNaNaS TOS in that case
17:47:18  <andythenorth> are we distributing single or dual-licensed?
17:47:43  <TrueBrain> andythenorth: do you understand the flaw in your argument you give us? GPLv2 wins, but you can dual license .. that makes little sense
17:47:45  <andythenorth> well are we distributing single or dual?
17:48:01  <TrueBrain> we supply the download under the license the author requested
17:48:01  <TrueBrain> WE do not distribute license
17:48:05  <TrueBrain> WE DO NOT distribute any license
17:48:19  <TrueBrain> just to repeat that part :P
17:48:19  <TrueBrain> we CANNOT distribute a license, as we are not any copyright holder
17:48:33  <TrueBrain> copyright holders have licenses
17:48:33  <andythenorth> I paste again
17:48:33  <FLHerne> andythenorth: BaNaNaS distributes under a single license, its TOS
17:48:33  <andythenorth> it's not my argument, it's FSF
17:48:44  <TrueBrain> you can paste all you want, but you fail to explain to me how dual licensing can work in the world you describe :)
17:49:13  <andythenorth> FLHerne ok so the text about GPL v2 is just an honest mistake and needs removed
17:49:13  <FLHerne> andythenorth: BaNaNaS *grants to its downloaders* a single license, the GPLv2
17:49:13  <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth: we are distributing with bananas license, every downloader gets gpl license
17:49:13  <andythenorth> no this is just a weird linguistic coin trick
17:49:13  <FLHerne> andythenorth: The TOS permits that
17:49:27  <TrueBrain> we are distributing UNDER the BaNaNaS license
17:49:27  <FLHerne> andythenorth: No
17:49:27  <milek7_> bananas distributes on bananas distribution license, license field is basically author declaration about the contents
17:49:27  <TrueBrain> to be more clear and correct :)
17:49:27  <andythenorth> "watch my glove watch my glove, don't watch the coin"
17:49:48  <FLHerne> andythenorth: Licenses aren't attached to the code, they're attached to the code and two parties
17:49:53  <andythenorth> wat?
17:50:08  <TrueBrain> licenses are between parties, ofc
17:50:08  <FLHerne> andythenorth: Author -> BaNaNaS is TOS
17:50:08  <TrueBrain> for GPL, between the author and the rest of the world :P
17:50:48  <FLHerne> andythenorth: Author -> directly to users is GPLv2, or whatever else the author feels like
17:50:48  <andythenorth> ok so which bits of this are just made up?
17:50:48  <andythenorth> "For example, if you distribute copies of such a program, whether gratis or for a fee, you must give the recipients all the rights that you have.  You must make sure that they, too, receive or can get the source code."
17:50:48  <TrueBrain> andythenorth: okay, other example: I buy a CD in the store
17:50:51  <FLHerne> andythenorth: BaNaNaS -> downloaders is whatever the author selected
17:50:51  <andythenorth> it's not metaphors TrueBrain :)
17:50:51  <TrueBrain> the CD doesn't allow me to copy the music and distribute it, right?
17:50:51  <andythenorth> it's not that I don't understand
17:51:08  <andythenorth> it's that you're all wrong
17:51:09  <TrueBrain> and you FAIL to tell us why
17:51:09  <TrueBrain> so I am trying to help you there :)
17:51:09  <FLHerne> andythenorth: Nothing, except that it's irrelevant
17:51:11  <andythenorth> are we distributing any GPL v2 content?
17:51:19  <TrueBrain> repeating yourself rarely helps in making your argument :)
17:51:19  <FLHerne> andythenorth: There's no such thing as "GPL v2 content"
17:51:26  <andythenorth> GPL v2 programs
17:51:54  <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth: bananas is still not distribution VIA the gpl
17:51:54  <TrueBrain> we have nothing to do with the GPL license, basically
17:51:54  <TrueBrain> how else do distribution platforms exist?
17:51:57  <andythenorth> Eddi|zuHause I thought that, because I thought the author conveys the program to the recipient via bananas
17:52:10  <andythenorth> but we have a ToS that says we are a distributor
17:52:30  <andythenorth> and that's where you are all trying to do the coin trick
17:52:31  <andythenorth> are we a distributor or not?
17:52:31  <FLHerne> Yes
17:52:48  <andythenorth> and do we distribute any GPL v2 programs?
17:52:48  <andythenorth> any?
17:53:00  <TrueBrain> if you own a GPLv2 program, can you license it to someone else under another license?
17:53:00  <Eddi|zuHause> yes, bananas is a distributor. yes, bananas distributes GPL content, no, bananas is NOT relying on gpl to distribute the GPL content
17:53:22  <andythenorth> Eddi|zuHause that isn't a possible state
17:53:22  <FLHerne> andythenorth: It is
17:53:52  <TrueBrain> so dual-licensing is impossible andythenorth , is what you are saying? Sorry, I keep coming back to that, and you are not addressing that :P
17:53:52  <andythenorth> no dual-licensing is entirely possible
17:53:55  <TrueBrain> so how does that work?
17:53:57  <TrueBrain> like, ever, with GPLv2?
17:54:01  <andythenorth> what is not possible is distributing GPL v2 programs without complying with GPL v2
17:54:16  <TrueBrain> so dual-licensing of GPLv2 can only be done if they are compatible?
17:54:35  <andythenorth> dunno
17:54:36  <TrueBrain> that is what you imply
17:54:36  <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth: what else do you think dual-licensing si?
17:54:42  <milek7_> I sort of understand andy
17:54:46  <milek7_> technically, file distributed from bananas IS NOT gpl licensed
17:54:58  <andythenorth> well why does it ship with the GPL v2 license then?
17:55:09  <TrueBrain> because you can ship different licenses?
17:55:10  <milek7_> but there's separate author declaration (between author and user, not bananas) that he shared that under GPL
17:55:50  <TrueBrain> I can have different license with you, than with milek7_ , than with FLHerne
17:55:50  <andythenorth> I wish I was wrong
17:55:50  <TrueBrain> and you can all see the license
17:55:50  <andythenorth> then I could draw a train
17:55:51  <TrueBrain> no andythenorth , you are not stating you know the truth
17:55:51  <TrueBrain> NONE of us are lawyers
17:55:51  <TrueBrain> MOST of this is uncontested in court
17:56:09  <TrueBrain> your interpretation is that this is not possible
17:56:12  <TrueBrain> don't mistake understanding for facts, please :)
17:56:19  <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth: bananas distributes under the bananas license, and just happens to pass on the gpl licence between author and downloader
17:56:37  <andythenorth> Eddi|zuHause that would be a convenient coin trick if we could pull it off
17:57:03  <andythenorth> but unfortunately the GPL v2 anticipates that case and doesn't permit it
17:57:22  <andythenorth> if we were not a distributor, all would be fine
17:57:34  <TrueBrain> you keep saying you cannot license software with 2 licenses :P
17:57:36  <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth: if bananas were passing on using the gpl, the licenses would be author-bananas and bananas-downloader, using the bananas license you now have author-bananas and author-downloader
17:58:09  <andythenorth> TrueBrain you can license it with 2
17:58:15  <andythenorth> but you don't get to just break one of them
17:58:34  <TrueBrain> and I would argue, they can
17:58:34  <FLHerne> andythenorth:
17:58:34  <TrueBrain> and here is in essence where we diverged
17:58:35  <Eddi|zuHause> nobody is breaking anything
17:58:46  <TrueBrain> you claim you have to comply with both licenses
17:58:46  <FLHerne> (I have literally zero artistic talent)
17:58:50  <TrueBrain> I claim you have to comply with either one
17:59:17  <TrueBrain> you say it is AND, I say it is XOR
17:59:17  <andythenorth> the GPL v2 is designed to prevent this pick-and-choose type affair
17:59:17  <TrueBrain> well, OR, but XOR sounds better :D
17:59:22  <TrueBrain> andythenorth: by USERS, yes
17:59:33  <TrueBrain> not by the copyright holder
17:59:36  <TrueBrain> who-ever uses the GPL software, he HAS to follow GPL
17:59:37  <TrueBrain> everyone agrees there
17:59:54  <andythenorth> and whoever distributes
17:59:54  <TrueBrain> but the copyright holder has freedom
17:59:54  <TrueBrain> the copyright holder can do what-ever-the-fuck-he-wants
17:59:55  <andythenorth> yes
18:00:26  <TrueBrain> including allowing us to distribute it :P
18:00:36  <andythenorth> yes
18:00:57  <andythenorth> including allowing us to distribute it to end users as GPL v2
18:00:57  <TrueBrain> so the only thing that -might- be invalid, is the author giving us this license, and say: but distribute it under GPLv2
18:00:57  <FLHerne> yes
18:01:11  <TrueBrain> but, that is really not our problem
18:01:37  <FLHerne> That bit's fine, it's just misleading to users
18:01:38  <andythenorth> oh I see
18:01:38  <andythenorth> ok
18:01:38  * andythenorth words
18:01:59  <FLHerne> andythenorth: Was my utterly terrible diagram any help? :D
18:02:14  <TrueBrain> I like that drawing FLHerne  :) It sums it up nicely
18:02:14  <andythenorth> sort of
18:02:28  <andythenorth> so the relationship between the author and us is irrelevant for GPL v2 yes/no?
18:02:28  <andythenorth> because of ToS?
18:02:28  <FLHerne> yes
18:02:28  <TrueBrain> owh boy, spam incoming .... ( DorpsGek_III this time)
18:02:51  <DorpsGek_III> [OpenTTD/bananas-api] pyup-bot opened pull request #76: Scheduled monthly dependency update for November
18:02:51  <andythenorth> and when the user downloads from us, what license do they get? (assuming the program is GPL v2)
18:03:10  <TrueBrain> they are granted the binary under GPLv2 license
18:03:36  <DorpsGek_III> [OpenTTD/bananas-frontend-cli] pyup-bot opened pull request #14: Scheduled monthly dependency update for November
18:03:36  <andythenorth> ok so we are distributor of GPL v2 programs yes/no?
18:03:36  <TrueBrain> misleading question
18:03:48  <TrueBrain> from our perspective, the license is our TOS
18:03:53  <andythenorth> the license to the end user?
18:03:56  <TrueBrain> that is how we perceive the content
18:04:09  <milek7_> I think that's what's andy getting at?
18:04:15  <DorpsGek_III> [OpenTTD/bananas-frontend-web] pyup-bot opened pull request #48: Scheduled monthly dependency update for November
18:04:37  <andythenorth> TrueBrain the ToS has no clauses that apply to end-user downloading?
18:04:57  <TrueBrain> andythenorth: E_DID_NOT_PARSE, can you be more specific?
18:05:13  <andythenorth> how does our Bananas ToS apply to end users who download a GPL v2 program from us?
18:05:22  <TrueBrain> the TOS is between authors and us
18:05:27  <andythenorth> right
18:05:27  <TrueBrain> not between us and end-users
18:05:27  <DorpsGek_III> [OpenTTD/bananas-server] pyup-bot opened pull request #36: Scheduled monthly dependency update for November
18:05:36  <andythenorth> so what's the license between us and end-users who have downloaded?
18:05:49  <TrueBrain> what-ever the author asked us it to be
18:05:58  <andythenorth> ok
18:06:09  <andythenorth> and sometimes that license is GPL v2?
18:06:20  <DorpsGek_III> [OpenTTD/DorpsGek] pyup-bot opened pull request #38: Scheduled monthly dependency update for November
18:06:28  <TrueBrain> you can try to lure us again and again in the same question: from our perspective, we use our TOS to distribute
18:06:29  <TrueBrain> not GPLv2
18:06:49  <TrueBrain> one can debate if that is allowed or not, but that would be a problem of the author, not of us as platform
18:07:01  <LordAro> TrueBrain: i'm not helping you fix all those pyup PRs :p
18:07:04  <andythenorth> so we aren't distributing any GPL v2 programs?
18:07:09  <FLHerne> andythenorth: > and sometimes that license is GPL v2?  <-- yes
18:07:11  <TrueBrain> LordAro: FINNNNEEEEEE :P
18:07:20  <andythenorth> did anyone draw my train yet
18:07:40  <FLHerne> andythenorth: And in that case, the end users being granted the license are bound by GPLv2
18:07:42  <TrueBrain> no, because what you are saying also means: if you license under GPLv2, any other license you provide has to be compatible
18:07:54  <FLHerne> andythenorth: BaNaNaS isn't, because it's granting the license
18:08:19  <andythenorth> FLHerne that would be a sustainable argument I think
18:08:31  <andythenorth> so that would just leave the question, why does Bananas violate the GPL v2?
18:08:36  <andythenorth> and are we remedying it?
18:08:47  <TrueBrain> we are not violating GPLv2
18:08:51  <TrueBrain> authors might
18:08:53  <TrueBrain> we are not
18:09:12  <andythenorth> I admire your sticking to this position
18:09:21  <andythenorth> it is much the better position
18:09:29  <TrueBrain> you do know those remarks are ... well ... mostly used to put people down
18:09:32  <TrueBrain> :P
18:10:02  <TrueBrain> I am surprised however that you would see BaNaNaS working without it being a distribution platform
18:10:14  <andythenorth> in a public logged channel, if we are having a specific plan to not comply with GPL v2, we should stick to our guns about why
18:10:20  <DorpsGek_III> [OpenTTD/master-server] pyup-bot opened pull request #21: Scheduled monthly dependency update for November
18:10:34  <TrueBrain> again, we are complying with GPLv2
18:10:36  <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth: whatever text is in the GPL only applies if you use the GPL terms to distribute the GPL'ed program
18:10:37  <andythenorth> TrueBrain I thought it was like a service, e.g. like email etc
18:10:43  <TrueBrain> you keep saying we are not, and I don't like that in public channels :D
18:10:44  <LordAro> TrueBrain: how did you know they were coming, ooi?
18:10:47  <andythenorth> Eddi|zuHause please, re-read that sentence
18:10:55  <TrueBrain> LordAro: I see all pushes to all repositories :)
18:11:06  <andythenorth> in what way can you not use the GPL terms to distribute the GPL'ed program? :o
18:11:08  <TrueBrain> DorpsGek_III is a bit more verbose to me :P
18:11:12  <DorpsGek_III> [OpenTTD/master-server-web] pyup-bot opened pull request #15: Scheduled monthly dependency update for November
18:11:13  <LordAro> aha
18:11:24  <LordAro> so the pushes happen noticably before the PRs are made?
18:11:33  <LordAro> i'd have thought they would be effectively instant
18:11:36  <TrueBrain> I have 41 unread messages in that channel :P
18:11:41  <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth: we are using the bananas TOS to distribute the GPL'ed program.
18:11:48  <TrueBrain> no, the bot pushes 1 change per time ..
18:11:58  <LordAro> ah right
18:12:19  * andythenorth might actually draw the train
18:12:27  <TrueBrain> I am surprised that in andythenorth 's world it is impossible that we use another license than the content we publish .. I guess he has issues with that .. and I get what he is coming from there .. but wouldn't that make any distribution platform impossible?
18:12:51  <andythenorth> I am just taking a strictly literal, naive interpretation of GPL v2 text
18:13:09  <TrueBrain> yes, you do, and you keep failing to explain why it would hold for OUR distribution under ANOTHER license
18:13:14  <andythenorth> words like 'distribute' and 'must' do not seem hard to understand
18:13:40  <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth: again, it doesn't matter what the text of the GPL is, as long as bananas doesn't use it to distribute the program
18:13:40  <TrueBrain> what if someone dual-licenses BSD and GPLv2?
18:13:46  <milek7_>
18:13:51  <TrueBrain> we can distribute under BSD, and not under GPLv2? Boom?
18:14:01  <frosch123> TrueBrain: the only cases of "" left are inside comments now
18:14:12  <TrueBrain> frosch123: \o/ \o/
18:14:12  <andythenorth> Eddi|zuHause at what point does the program under bananas ToS become back under GPL v2?
18:14:30  <TrueBrain> andythenorth: you perceive licenses in a funny way :)
18:14:38  <andythenorth> Eddi|zuHause can we agree that if the end user receives it under GPL v2, at some point GPL v2 must be applied?
18:14:52  <TrueBrain> you don't receive licenses
18:15:01  <TrueBrain> a copyright holder makes a license between two parties: him and someone on the other end
18:15:28  <andythenorth> you do receive the GPL v2
18:15:34  <andythenorth> it's in the license text
18:15:38  <TrueBrain> andythenorth: what if all people uploading under GPLv2 changed their LICENSE file with a header on top: OPENTTD IS ALLOWED TO DISTRIBUTE THIS FREELY WITHOUT SOURCE
18:15:38  <TrueBrain> would that solve your issue?
18:15:55  <andythenorth> no
18:15:55  <TrueBrain> why not?
18:15:55  <TrueBrain> it is in the same license
18:16:05  <TrueBrain> so it is not GPLv2, but GPLv2+something
18:16:14  <andythenorth> oh I see a way
18:16:20  <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth: the user doesn't even need to agree to the GPL until he plans to re-distribute it, but that's a different topic
18:16:24  <andythenorth> my way is an alternative stupid coin trick
18:16:45  *** DasPoseidon has joined #openttd
18:16:59  <andythenorth> hmm nvm, doesn't work
18:17:02  <TrueBrain> andythenorth: you didn't explain your "no"
18:17:12  <TrueBrain> and I am going somewhere with this example ;)
18:17:21  *** DasPoseidon has quit IRC
18:17:23  <TrueBrain> I can write any license text I want, right? So I can simply write: GPLv2, but OpenTTD is exempt
18:17:30  <TrueBrain> that is fine, not?
18:17:34  <andythenorth> sorry, I got lost in a get-out-of-jail idea
18:17:39  <TrueBrain> :P
18:17:47  <TrueBrain> we don't need it, as we already have it, but that is okay :)
18:18:08  <TrueBrain> so if everyone would change their LICENSE file, you would agree it is fine to use it like that, right?
18:18:49  <TrueBrain> (ironically, some distribution platforms have asked this btw; to explicitly except them from the license conditions)
18:18:59  <longtomjr> Legal discussion, what happened?
18:19:17  <TrueBrain> the thing here is the explicit vs the implicit andythenorth  .. licenses don't have to be explicit
18:19:38  <TrueBrain> (well, explicit for the public)
18:19:49  <TrueBrain> lol .. wrong way of using explicit :D
18:19:49  <andythenorth> the 'no' is based on "You may not copy, modify, sublicense, or distribute the Program except as expressly provided under this License."
18:19:55  <TrueBrain> yes .. we modified the license
18:20:03  <TrueBrain> the license now says: EXCEPT FOR OPENTTD
18:20:03  <TrueBrain> nothing wrong with that, is it?
18:20:23  <TrueBrain> GPLv2 is not some magic thing that cannot be modified .. I am free to alter the text how-ever I want .. it is not GPLv2, sure, but the conditions still apply
18:20:42  <FLHerne>
18:20:44  <andythenorth> probably fine, but is it the best remedy?
18:20:52  <TrueBrain> no no, I am not trying to remedy anything
18:21:01  <TrueBrain> I am pointing out: you can observe our TOS as being on top of the LICENSE file
18:21:03  <TrueBrain> from our perspective
18:21:38  <TrueBrain> the copyright holder changed the "total" LICENSE file to include that we can distribute it under our TOS
18:21:38  <TrueBrain> so it is not explicit in the LICENSE file
18:21:38  <TrueBrain> although we could do that
18:21:39  <TrueBrain> but it is there nevertheless
18:21:54  <TrueBrain> hence, your argument fails there
18:22:08  <TrueBrain> (as we don't have to announce our distribution license to the end-user, basically)
18:22:11  <andythenorth> oof this fun argument is keeping me away from my intent :P
18:22:17  <andythenorth> which was to release a new Iron Horse on bananas
18:22:23  *** DasPoseidon has joined #openttd
18:22:28  <TrueBrain> so another way to observe this: we get the license from the author with GPLv2 + a big header indicate what is written in our TOS
18:22:29  <andythenorth> which I can't do legally :P
18:22:37  <TrueBrain> before we ship it to the end-user, we stripped our TOS header
18:22:39  <TrueBrain> that is what "legally" is going on
18:22:52  <Eddi|zuHause> i don't see how anyone is actually moving in this discussion
18:23:05  <andythenorth> I moved a bit
18:23:10  <TrueBrain> I would like to think I just approached this in a novel way Eddi|zuHause
18:23:21  <andythenorth> I started from it's "all fine, GPL v2" allows this
18:23:21  <andythenorth> then FLHerne proved I was wrong
18:23:40  <FLHerne> Sorry :-(
18:23:50  <TrueBrain> as I hope I now showed andythenorth that it is fine to work with licenses like that
18:24:10  <andythenorth> I already knew that I was distributing my grfs illegally TBH
18:24:10  <TrueBrain> the point he basically argues with, is if we should show that "combined" LICENSE file or not ;)
18:24:49  <andythenorth> TrueBrain no, the point is whether we can evade being a 'distributor' in the sense GPL v2 intends
18:24:49  <TrueBrain> the thing is .. that would only fuzz the waters for 99% of the public
18:24:49  <TrueBrain> andythenorth: no; that is not what we try to do
18:24:57  <TrueBrain> we extended the license with some exceptions
18:25:13  <TrueBrain> so we are not trying to evade anything
18:25:26  <TrueBrain> we legally have the rights to do what we do :)
18:25:26  <Eddi|zuHause> there is no way for bananas not to count as a distributor
18:25:36  <TrueBrain> really, absolutely no way :)
18:25:39  <andythenorth> I can't see a way
18:25:45  <TrueBrain> we never intended not to be :P
18:25:53  <TrueBrain> being a distributor helps for a lot of things
18:25:54  <FLHerne> andythenorth: There's no way to evade being a distributor without breaking the intended purposes of Bananas
18:26:02  <andythenorth> the "it's like email" case would never stack up if we want to have rights to keep the content
18:26:06  <TrueBrain> basically .. "comply with any DMCA request, and you can't be sued"
18:26:09  <TrueBrain> a good place to sit :P
18:26:44  <andythenorth> so we're definitely not accidentally a publisher, right?
18:26:58  <andythenorth> being a publisher would be undesirable
18:26:59  <TrueBrain> but you try to argue that because we are a distributor, we have to comply with GPLv2, while we argue: our license is an extension to GPLv2, if you want to look at it from that point :)
18:27:06  <TrueBrain> how would we be a publisher? :D
18:27:25  <andythenorth> not
18:27:25  <TrueBrain> we really are a distribution platform
18:27:36  <TrueBrain> we store and make available for download
18:27:44  <andythenorth> ok so the argument is we extend GPL v2?
18:27:59  <TrueBrain> well, legally we don't do it that way, but it is a fine way to look at it
18:28:00  <TrueBrain> just see our TOS being on top of LICENSE
18:28:15  <TrueBrain> and call it GPLv2+BaNaNaS excempt
18:28:20  <TrueBrain> for all I care :P
18:28:20  <andythenorth> I tend to agree, but I think we're at cross purposes about the problem
18:28:26  <FLHerne> That sounds like a confusing way to describe it, but eh
18:28:27  <andythenorth> shall we stop?
18:28:42  <FLHerne> Sure
18:28:42  <TrueBrain> FLHerne: I think it is pretty elegant, as nobody could deny that would be a valid license :)
18:28:45  <FLHerne> andythenorth: Did my revised, slightly-less-shit diagram help? :p
18:28:54  <TrueBrain> mainly as they exist .. "GPLv2 unless you are a nuclear powerplant"
18:29:46  <TrueBrain> if you are a nuclear powerplant: STOP USING OUR SOFTWARE NOW
18:29:47  <FLHerne> TrueBrain: yeah, but people could deny that it describes the actual situation
18:29:47  <TrueBrain> people can deny a lot of things :P
18:29:47  <TrueBrain> fine .. I was trying to stop running the circles we were doing
18:29:52  <FLHerne> Maybe we should just stop
18:29:57  <andythenorth> I would just stop
18:30:10  * FLHerne just stops
18:30:10  <andythenorth> also FLHerne sorry I said you had misread the GPL
18:30:10  <andythenorth> you were correct
18:30:17  <andythenorth> my recollection was all wrong :P
18:30:23  <FLHerne> ok thanks :-)
18:30:26  <milek7_> TrueBrain: I don't think it is realistic to make blanket statement as "X and you can't be sued"
18:30:33  <milek7_> as you can always be sued :P
18:30:42  <TrueBrain> milek7_: everything in context
18:30:45  <milek7_> or things like viacom v. youtube wouldn't happen etc.
18:31:15  <TrueBrain> as if you go that road, you cannot make any statement
18:31:16  <TrueBrain> lawyers will find a way to proof you wrong
18:32:16  <andythenorth> law is rarely 0 and 1
18:32:16  <TrueBrain> most of this never seen court
18:32:21  <TrueBrain> which makes most of this an opinion
18:32:24  <TrueBrain> more than a fact
18:33:59  <longtomjr> If there is a lawyer somewhere, that decides to make a case against Openttd because of copyright, there will have to probably be notices and cease and desist before there is a threat. IANAL
18:34:38  <TrueBrain> the discussion was not about OpenTTD, but about BaNaNaS :)
18:34:47  <FLHerne> Anyway, sorry for provoking the long and somewhat-loopy argument
18:35:09  <FLHerne> Do we need one about OpenTTD?
18:35:10  <TrueBrain> this channel has never been this active
18:35:10  <TrueBrain> not sure what you are sorry about :P
18:35:22  * FLHerne has some ideas about the definition of reverse-engineering too :-)
18:35:57  <longtomjr> Have we figured out the color of the shed yet, or should we start that discussion.
18:35:57  <andythenorth> FLHerne it was co-incidental timing, I need to make a written offer for all the grfs and include it
18:35:57  <Eddi|zuHause> longtomjr: if there ever is a cease and desist letter against openttd, the project will be shut down
18:35:57  <andythenorth> probably in readme I guess
18:35:57  <FLHerne> cornflower blue
18:36:16  <Eddi|zuHause> longtomjr: there is no way we can actually fight that
18:36:22  <TrueBrain> what FLHerne  says
18:36:42  <longtomjr> Eddi|zuHause, yep probably, or we have to get someone like the fsf to take the case if they are interested.
18:37:07  <longtomjr> Anyways, lets get back to shedds.
18:37:45  <TrueBrain> the one good thing about breaking any license of any kind .. you need someone who is willing to sue first
18:37:45  <TrueBrain> so I come back again: we did our best with everything we did to comply and follow the rules as much as we understand them
18:38:06  <FLHerne> andythenorth: Hm, I think I was actually wrong :p
18:38:16  <TrueBrain> no, you said you were going to stop :P
18:38:17  <TrueBrain> :D
18:39:01  <frosch123> how many ships did you all draw during the discussion?
18:39:17  <longtomjr> I decorated one station
18:39:33  <longtomjr> but I joined late, and my station still looks bad
18:39:39  <longtomjr> so no ships
18:39:51  <FLHerne> The GPL does allow redistribution of unmodified binary versions without providing the source, but only non-commercially and if you tell people where the person you got it from said the source was
18:40:28  <FLHerne> BaNaNaS doesn't comply with that last bit anyway, so it's irrelevant to most of this discussion
18:42:47  * FLHerne goes back to being confused at nmlc
18:52:48  <andythenorth> frosch123 0
18:54:46  <andythenorth> FLHerne (putting aside previous discussion) the problem is 95% with the authors not providing the written offer
18:55:28  <FLHerne> andythenorth: I think the more fundamental issue is with the conflict with non-sole-authors and the ToS
18:55:43  <andythenorth> I am going to entirely not pay attention to that :)
18:55:52  <FLHerne> Frankly, the 'written offer' thing is cosmetic trivia that no-one cares about
18:56:18  <andythenorth> it seems naive from 30 years later
18:56:30  <FLHerne> Including a GPL license makes it clear that the source exists, and it's usually easy to find
18:56:30  <andythenorth> like when I have commercial contracts which have to have a seal
18:56:43  <andythenorth> or that fax is legal, but email transmission isn't :P
18:57:39  <FLHerne> Whereas the ToS issue does actually breach the license in a way that breaks the intent
18:57:57  <FLHerne> But tbh, in that case the source is *still* usually available somewhere
18:58:18  <FLHerne> So I still doubt anyone cares
18:58:59  * andythenorth is concerned about GPL notices in source files right now
18:58:59  <andythenorth> I removed them all from my grfs
18:59:07  <andythenorth> but GPL v2 is hazy on whether they are needed
18:59:14  <FLHerne> I think that's another case of "who the hell cares?"
18:59:41  <andythenorth> did you never want 10/10 on your school spelling test? :P
19:00:06  <andythenorth> GPL v2 'how to' says every source file must have them
19:00:06  <andythenorth> but the license, the legal text, does not
19:00:06  <FLHerne> I used to use a one-line header
19:00:17  <FLHerne> Then someone from the FSF told me that was bad and I should use the full one
19:00:25  <FLHerne> So I stopped using one at all
19:00:45  <andythenorth> I was a big fan of GPL
19:00:45  <FLHerne> I'm pretty sure it doesn't breach the license not to
19:00:45  <andythenorth> but I am starting to find it a bit clown shoes
19:00:46  <FLHerne> It's ok
19:01:05  <andythenorth> " It is safest to attach them to the start of each source file to most effectively convey the exclusion of warranty; and each file should have at least the "copyright" line and a pointer to where the full notice is found.
19:01:13  <andythenorth> 'safest' and 'should' are not very legally robust
19:01:32  <FLHerne> In a way, it's a product of the '90s when large companies definitely would just fork and start closed-source projects based on the same code
19:01:39  <FLHerne> If you used BSD/MIT
19:03:16  <FLHerne> These days, Amazon/Google/Facebook/Intel/etc. have got the hang of contributing to public projects, so you can get away with non-copyleft most of the time
19:03:52  <FLHerne> andythenorth: I think it's just to stop people copying the code and claiming not to have seen the license
19:03:56  <FLHerne> But that defence wouldn't stand up in court anyway
19:04:29  <TrueBrain> can you make divs appears/disappears based on a combobox selection? (CSS-only if possible?)
19:04:37  <andythenorth> it's moderately annoying that GPL FAQs have no boilerplate example for 'written offer'
19:05:18  <andythenorth> TrueBrain in my world that requires JS, but maybe there's more modern css selectors now
19:05:18  <FLHerne> TrueBrain: Doesn't the old downloads page have that?
19:05:18  <FLHerne> Uses some JS though
19:06:18  <FLHerne>
19:06:49  <TrueBrain> yeah, was hoping to avoid a bit of javascript
19:06:49  <TrueBrain> I think it can be done with CSS these days
19:07:14  <FLHerne> I'd like to know how if so :-)
19:07:53  <FLHerne> Oh, I have an idea
19:08:22  <FLHerne> No
19:08:56  <FLHerne> I was thinking sibling selectors and something with option::selected ~ whatever
19:09:08  <FLHerne> But the divs won't be siblings of the options
19:09:25  <andythenorth> TrueBrain ?
19:09:49  <andythenorth> oh that only styles the option I guess
19:10:27  <FLHerne> I didn't read the question as being that
19:10:27  <andythenorth> hmm
19:10:27  <FLHerne> There's no parent-of selector for good reasons
19:10:27  <FLHerne> No-one wants their CSS to have infinite loops
19:10:48  <FLHerne> Well, I'm sure someone would be thrilled to have Turing-complete CSS
19:11:10  * andythenorth finds example written offers
19:11:10  <andythenorth>
19:11:34  <andythenorth> also
19:12:00  <andythenorth> interestingly GPL v2 FAQs say that a snail-mail physical media option is mandatory
19:12:33  <FLHerne> andythenorth: If anyone asks, print it out and send it to them :p
19:12:41  <FLHerne> It would be funny
19:13:16  <frosch123> 7k8 errors, i forgot where i started... is that 75% done?
19:14:03  <TrueBrain> 28k yesterday :P
19:14:03  <TrueBrain> so getting smaler :D
19:16:00  <andythenorth> hmm other authors seem to think a url is sufficient as a written offer
19:16:18  <andythenorth> load of words here
19:16:29  <andythenorth> blah blah stuff
19:16:36  <andythenorth> "3(b) bundle a written offer good for three years to provide that source upon request. (These days this is often a URL)."
19:17:11  <andythenorth> so maybe either in the readme, and/or in the online docs
19:17:36  <andythenorth> so close, but so far away :P
19:17:58  <andythenorth> the docs linked there are the wrong ones :P
19:18:51  <andythenorth> hmm Iron Horse source is smaller than the grf, maybe we could just put source on bananas :P
19:19:08  <andythenorth> FSF say the source has to be the exact version for the binary, not newer, not older
19:19:35  * andythenorth envisages explaining "git co [tag]" to a future court
19:19:42  <FLHerne> andythenorth: Readme should be good
19:19:54  <FLHerne> I don't think separate online docs is technically sufficient
19:27:34  <andythenorth> also I defeated my own argument from earlier, TB is right
19:28:02  <andythenorth> I was sure we had it sorted when the Russian guy was arguing
19:28:31  <andythenorth> we did
19:31:07  <TrueBrain> FLHerne: can't be done with CSS indeed :( Bah
19:32:48  <FLHerne> Wait, have we run out of disagreements?
19:32:58  <FLHerne> quick, we need more
19:34:38  <andythenorth> we can disagree about whether to close PRs?
19:34:38  <andythenorth> if they're aging?
19:37:42  <TrueBrain> "Note: if you pick GPL v2, GPL v3 or LGPL v2.1, you are obligated to also make your source code available. Please make sure either the "Project site" points to your source code or that the location to your source code is in the description. "
19:37:44  <FLHerne> Oh, that
19:37:45  <TrueBrain> any additions?
19:37:49  <FLHerne> We settled that, you're wrong
19:37:58  <FLHerne> (:p)
19:39:09  <TrueBrain> funny, releasing scenarios under GPL .. now that is interesting :D
19:39:25  <FLHerne> TrueBrain: "You cannot upload grfs to BaNaNaS if they use code from another author under a GPL variant and they have not given separate permission"
19:39:30  <FLHerne> bad wording
19:39:46  <TrueBrain> FLHerne: is that true if you link the source, still?
19:40:20  <andythenorth> TrueBrain readme would also be valid, if provided
19:40:30  <TrueBrain> andythenorth: harder for us to validate; so I wanted to keep it a bit more strict if possible
19:40:33  <TrueBrain> but I guess
19:40:38  <FLHerne> "If your grf includes code written by another author that you have used under GPL terms, you cannot upload it to BaNaNaS without separate permission from that author"
19:40:46  <FLHerne> TrueBrain: I think so :-/
19:41:16  <TrueBrain> FLHerne: why? As if they provide the source link, they are allowed to distribute it, not?
19:41:26  <TrueBrain> (honest question, to be clear)
19:41:36  <FLHerne> TrueBrain: They can, but only under GPL or a compatible license
19:41:36  <TrueBrain> ofc
19:41:47  <FLHerne> i.e. not under BaNaNaS-ToS
19:41:50  <andythenorth> bananas is at that point compatible (I think the argument goes)
19:42:02  <TrueBrain> GPL allows licensing with compatible license
19:42:03  <TrueBrain> for those cases, we are compatible, not?
19:42:03  <andythenorth> bananas doesn't remove any GPL rights
19:42:03  <FLHerne> Because that doesn't enforce the recipient (BaNaNaS) provide the source etc
19:42:21  <andythenorth> I figured that out
19:42:21  <TrueBrain> that is why I want to add these two lines above
19:42:28  <TrueBrain> that does force them to link the source
19:42:48  <TrueBrain> wouldn't that resolve this whole situation?
19:42:48  <andythenorth> FLHerne if author doesn't provide the written offer for source, they haven't validly licensed it under GPL v2
19:42:54  <andythenorth> so GPL v2 cannot be enforced
19:43:13  <andythenorth> if they provide a full GPL v2 license, then they can also accept Bananas
19:43:35  <FLHerne> TrueBrain: Did you see ?
19:43:58  <FLHerne> The case I think is a problem is on the right
19:44:12  *** planetmaker has quit IRC
19:44:25  <TrueBrain> that would claim our ToS would violate GPLv2, even if there is a source link?
19:44:27  <FLHerne> TrueBrain: I believe BaNaNaS could fall back on clause 3 (b) of the GPLv2 here
19:44:33  <FLHerne> But it would need a ToS change
19:44:47  <andythenorth> it falls back on clause 3 (c)
19:45:04  <FLHerne> Sorry, I meant 3(c)
19:45:05  <TrueBrain> elaborate?
19:45:07  <andythenorth> what's the proposed ToS change?
19:45:20  <andythenorth> something something 'valid license'?
19:46:10  <FLHerne> Hm, no, perhaps it's already sufficient
19:46:22  <TrueBrain> as far as I understand the argument, it is about not linking the source .. otherwise our ToS should be GPLv2 compatible, I hope :P
19:46:38  <andythenorth> I think it's fine, and I would be -0.5 on trying to armchair lawyer extra rigour
19:46:38  <FLHerne> To ensure it stays inline with 3(c), it needs to prohibit BaNaNaS from distributing it with the source link or license removed
19:46:39  <andythenorth> FLHerne no it doesn't :)
19:46:53  <michi_cc> To chime in here, I'd  say that with the Bananas TOS/license right now the case on the right is indeed a problem.
19:46:53  <TrueBrain> FLHerne: that is kinda implied, so I am fine with that
19:47:23  <FLHerne> But I *think* the list of cases in (6) of the ToS, which excludes changing those files, is sufficient
19:47:34  <michi_cc> If you've used stuff solely under GPL, you are not at liberty to re-license it under any random other license unless it is explicitly compatible.
19:47:50  <TrueBrain> FLHerne: yeah, it is really "repackage" for a reason :)
19:48:16  <TrueBrain> FLHerne: honestly, I have no problem adding an entry in the ToS making it explicit that you supply the source when you use GPL as license
19:48:30  <michi_cc> And the whole written offer thing from GPL really is a can of worms as it can be interpreted as "written" in the legal sense with mostly means physically written.
19:48:51  <TrueBrain> michi_cc: in many EU countries they agree'd that "written" can also be email, these days :)
19:48:51  <FLHerne> michi_cc: We had that discussion a few lines up :p
19:48:51  <TrueBrain> they are progressingggggggggggg
19:49:03  <andythenorth> TrueBrain I don't think us requiring offer for source legally required, but would head off certain issues
19:49:19  *** ^Spike^ has quit IRC
19:49:19  *** Hirundo has quit IRC
19:49:19  *** Hazzard has quit IRC
19:49:19  *** Yexo has quit IRC
19:49:20  *** Osai has quit IRC
19:49:20  *** Ammler has quit IRC
19:49:20  *** avdg has quit IRC
19:49:20  *** XeryusTC has quit IRC
19:49:30  <TrueBrain> andythenorth: the whole TOS is (mostly) not build for legal reasons, but more for people to understand what we expect of them, honestly :)
19:50:11  <andythenorth> "something something *you* comply with the license you choose"
19:50:33  * andythenorth against armchair lawyering though
19:50:33  <FLHerne> michi_cc: I think we just barely squeeze through with the "offer of source" in the README being compatible with GPL under 3(c), so it doesn't need to be relicensed
19:50:33  *** V453000 has quit IRC
19:50:44  <FLHerne> Of course, this entirely contradicts my previous position
19:51:07  <andythenorth> "its all fine"
19:51:12  <michi_cc> TrueBrain: This is one of those really nice international problem areas. German law for example knows "Schriftform" and "Textform", where only Textform can be email.
19:51:17  <FLHerne> This seems like a "have it both ways" interpretation
19:51:20  <longtomjr> did's IRC just go down?
19:51:45  <andythenorth> FLHerne none of my argument was about our ToS vs GPL v2
19:51:56  <michi_cc> Which means for an english law text, there's ample ways to argue how to translate words :)
19:52:06  <andythenorth> my entire argument was that we're not complying with GPL v2 in multiple cases, but I now see what that's moot
19:52:13  <andythenorth> what / why /s
19:52:21  <longtomjr> Anyways, I am off for the evening, good luck
19:52:24  *** V453000 has joined #openttd
19:52:42  <FLHerne> michi_cc: tbh, I can't imagine that anyone would ever argue that a NewGRF should come with a paper source offer
19:53:00  <FLHerne> You'd have to send your postal address when applying to download it
19:53:00  <andythenorth> it would be highly jurisdictional I think
19:53:10  <andythenorth> oh FLHerne that would trigger GDPR :D
19:53:12  <andythenorth> lol
19:53:31  <michi_cc> Just the make sure, it is definitely not any problem from the Bananas side of view, but might be one of the author/uploader.
19:53:34  <FLHerne> The law does pay *some* attention to common sense and usage
19:53:50  <FLHerne> Right
19:54:12  <TrueBrain> can I suggest this TOS change:
19:54:13  <TrueBrain>
19:54:16  <TrueBrain> (only 1) is changed)
19:54:18  <FLHerne> (if you mailed grf collections to people on CDs then yes, sure)
19:54:40  <andythenorth> TrueBrain I think that's good armchair lawyering
19:55:03  <FLHerne> nitpick: "content which comply with" <- pick a tense/plural :p
19:55:22  <TrueBrain> please correct rather than point out
19:55:25  <FLHerne> Otherwise I like it
19:55:34  <TrueBrain> (as in, say what you want it to be, not where there is an error :D)
19:55:52  *** planetmaker has joined #openttd
19:55:52  *** ChanServ sets mode: +o planetmaker
19:55:55  <FLHerne> "You will only upload content that complies with license agreements:" ?
19:56:02  <TrueBrain> ah .. isn't content plural?
19:56:35  *** ^Spike^ has joined #openttd
19:57:01  <FLHerne> It is, but it's non-countable :p
19:57:23  *** XeryusTC has joined #openttd
19:57:23  *** Yexo has joined #openttd
19:57:24  <TrueBrain> weird language :P
19:57:35  * FLHerne tries to figure out grammar enough to explain it coherently
19:57:39  <FLHerne> (assuming that's even possible)
19:57:55  *** avdg has joined #openttd
19:59:30  *** Hazzard has joined #openttd
19:59:40  *** Osai has joined #openttd
19:59:40  *** Ammler has joined #openttd
20:00:07  <FLHerne> Because 'content' is a non-countable noun, i.e. you can have "some content" but not "five content", it behaves as if it's singular in most sentences
20:00:17  <FLHerne> For some reason
20:00:20  <andythenorth> I could not have explained that
20:01:06  *** longtomjr has quit IRC
20:02:19  *** tokai has joined #openttd
20:02:19  *** ChanServ sets mode: +v tokai
20:02:22  <FLHerne> (On the same lines, you can have less content but not fewer content, which is a popular distinction for pedants)
20:03:15  <DorpsGek_III> [OpenTTD/bananas-frontend-web] TrueBrain opened pull request #49: Add: introduce more clear guidines in the use of GPL licenses
20:03:26  <TrueBrain> see the individual commit for the changes (first commit copies 1.3 to 1.4)
20:03:32  <TrueBrain> frosch123: I would like your approval on this if you don't mind terribly :)
20:04:02  <FLHerne> TrueBrain: first commit title -- typo should be 'guidelines'
20:04:27  <TrueBrain> nice catch :)
20:04:29  *** planetmaker has quit IRC
20:04:29  <DorpsGek_III> [OpenTTD/bananas-frontend-web] TrueBrain updated pull request #49: Add: introduce more clear guidelines in the use of GPL licenses
20:05:30  <TrueBrain> ironically, this should also solve andythenorth's argument :P
20:05:30  *** ^Spike^ has quit IRC
20:05:30  <andythenorth> it does
20:05:57  <TrueBrain> ignoring if it was a valid argument, many things can be solved by making it more clear to the user in the first place :)
20:06:02  <frosch123> aw, that's what you needed the div-hiding for :p i was wondering about wiki magic
20:06:14  <andythenorth> it was the best argument
20:06:29  <FLHerne> Oh, hang on
20:06:29  <TrueBrain> yeah, I wanted the p only show up when you selected GPL stuff frosch123  :)
20:06:31  <andythenorth> the most beautiful argument, made by the very best people
20:06:40  <andythenorth> 4 more years
20:06:53  <TrueBrain> 2 more days ... I am so curious
20:06:53  *** avdg has quit IRC
20:06:53  <FLHerne> I don't think this works for GPLv3 :-(
20:07:16  *** XeryusTC has quit IRC
20:07:16  *** V453000 has quit IRC
20:07:16  <TrueBrain> GPLv3 was more relaxed with source, not?
20:07:16  <andythenorth> FLHerne based on license, or FAQs?
20:07:18  <FLHerne> The equivalent is section 6 (c), but that only applies if you received the binary copy in physical form
20:07:32  <FLHerne> (and 'occasionally', whatever that means in legalese)
20:07:46  <TrueBrain> it has been well established that "supply source" these days is a link to GitHub, tbh
20:08:15  * andythenorth reads
20:08:43  <FLHerne> Oh, 6 (d) might cover it
20:08:48  <andythenorth> 6 (d) seems fine
20:08:56  <andythenorth> seems to anticipate all the relevant cases
20:08:57  <FLHerne> "If the place to copy the object code is a network server, the Corresponding Source may be on a different server (operated by you or a third party) that supports equivalent copying facilities, provided you maintain clear directions next to the object code saying where to find the Corresponding Source. Regardless of what server hosts the Corresponding Source, you remain obligated to ensure that it is available for as long as needed to satisfy these requirements."
20:09:21  <FLHerne> The last bit may be an issue
20:09:21  *** tokai|noir has quit IRC
20:09:38  <FLHerne> i.e. if grf authors' source links break, BaNaNaS is obliged to take down the content
20:09:41  * andythenorth reads more
20:09:41  <TrueBrain> FLHerne: I am fine with that, honestly
20:09:41  <andythenorth> v3 uses 'convey' more
20:10:03  <TrueBrain> FLHerne: well, more strict: the author is obligated to remove the content from BaNaNaS :)
20:10:07  <FLHerne> TrueBrain: But then it breaks the "all BaNaNaS-downloaded content will always be available" promise to users
20:10:29  <FLHerne> TrueBrain: No, because BaNaNaS is the distributing party here
20:10:31  <TrueBrain> violations of any kind are exempt from that statement :P
20:10:55  <TrueBrain> if someone violate license, it will be removed, also for savegames
20:10:55  <FLHerne> (and we can't rely on the ToS-as-license-to-distribute, because then we have the other issue)
20:11:14  *** Osai has quit IRC
20:11:33  <TrueBrain> FLHerne: yeah, the same argument goes here: the author is responsible for providing us with correct information; they licensed us, if they were not allowed, they are to blame
20:11:34  <TrueBrain> we add these statements to make them aware of that duty
20:11:38  <FLHerne> TrueBrain: No
20:12:11  <FLHerne> 6 (d) explicitly states that it's our problem even if a third-party hosted it
20:12:15  <andythenorth> yes that's some poor drafting right there
20:12:15  <TrueBrain> yes, but we had this talk :D They give us a distribution license
20:12:24  <TrueBrain> if they are allowed to do that or not, is up to them
20:12:26  <TrueBrain> if they follow GPLv3
20:12:28  <TrueBrain> we are compatible
20:12:32  <TrueBrain> and as such, there is no problem
20:12:32  <FLHerne> TrueBrain: We had that, but then you have the GPL incompatibility
20:12:53  <TrueBrain> if they fail to provide the source, they are not GPLv3
20:12:54  *** Yexo has quit IRC
20:13:02  <TrueBrain> so as soon as someone tells us: this is not correct
20:13:09  <TrueBrain> we remove the content
20:13:14  <TrueBrain> (well, we give the author some time to restore, ofc)
20:13:14  <andythenorth> "you remain obligated to ensure that it is available for as long as needed to satisfy these requirements"
20:13:14  <FLHerne> I can see your argument, but in the long run that seems like a practical issue
20:13:33  <andythenorth> we can delegate the obligation
20:13:33  <andythenorth> the author has to make the source available
20:13:33  <andythenorth> they're obligated
20:13:43  <FLHerne> If openttdcoop breaks, say, or even the domain changes
20:13:43  <andythenorth> so it chains
20:13:43  <TrueBrain> well, I can go one step further: with this new TOS, they are in violation of our TOS
20:13:43  <andythenorth> legal shit flows uphill
20:14:01  <FLHerne> The source doesn't only have to be available somewhere, but at the original URL
20:14:02  <andythenorth> are we required to remedy somebody else's GPL violation?
20:14:14  <andythenorth> that would be an interesting court case
20:14:14  <FLHerne> In theory you'd have to take down about half the grfs :p
20:14:37  <TrueBrain> this is what makes these statements in GPL impracticel
20:14:37  <TrueBrain> and as such, I am more worried to comply with the intent
20:14:37  <TrueBrain> more than the strict letter
20:14:54  <andythenorth> it's really quite poor drafting
20:15:06  <TrueBrain> the biggest issue you rightfully pointed out (although I am still not sure that was your initial argument :D), if someone uploads a derived work, he might violate the license without knowing
20:15:14  <FLHerne> tbh, I think the ideal solution intent-wise would be for BaNaNaS to have a "download source" button for each grf version...
20:15:15  <TrueBrain> andythenorth: I have no clue what that means (lacking the english understanding)
20:15:26  <FLHerne> There are obvious practical issues with that idea though
20:15:26  <andythenorth> GPL increasingly reminds of When I Tried To Write Legal Agreements, 20 years ago
20:15:27  <TrueBrain> FLHerne: which is not managable, honestly
20:15:36  <andythenorth> like employment contracts and business contracts and shit
20:15:45  <TrueBrain> FLHerne: that only really works if we build the binaries from the source
20:15:48  <andythenorth> it's not like proper law
20:15:49  *** Ammler has quit IRC
20:15:50  <TrueBrain> as otherwise anyone can upload what-ever
20:16:37  <TrueBrain> there has to be a certain amount of trust between BaNaNaS and the authors
20:16:37  <TrueBrain> we are trying to be a good neighbour, we are not trying to be legally correct on all possibly outcomes
20:16:37  <FLHerne> TrueBrain: But then people will want to upload grfs compiled using custom-patched m4nfo, or whatever ridiculous nonsense stack andythenorth is using now
20:16:37  <andythenorth> nobody in a commercial contract would write 'a network server' now
20:16:37  <FLHerne> (install all the python libs)
20:16:37  <andythenorth> they'd write 'or equivalent technology'
20:16:37  <TrueBrain> FLHerne: exactly why that is just an impossible situation
20:16:39  <andythenorth> unless the server was a specific deliverable
20:16:40  <FLHerne> Yeah :-(
20:17:07  <FLHerne> TrueBrain: What stops uploaders putting random crap in the grf tarball currently?
20:17:09  <andythenorth> also no good lawyer should have let 6 (d) pass
20:17:27  <TrueBrain> FLHerne: LOTS of validation
20:17:27  <TrueBrain> LOTS and LOTS
20:17:27  <FLHerne> Ok :-)
20:17:43  <andythenorth> " the Corresponding Source may be on a different server (operated by you or a third party)" but also "you remain obligated to ensure that it is available for as long as needed to satisfy these requirements"
20:17:43  <TrueBrain> we are sure it is a valid GRF in terms that OpenTTD can load it
20:17:43  <TrueBrain> if you rename a Word document as .grf, it won't work
20:17:43  <andythenorth> it can be third party, but we are obligated?
20:18:21  <TrueBrain> but okay, it really can be resolved as simple as: when reported, we will deal with it
20:18:38  <FLHerne> andythenorth: If you choose a third party, it's on you to contract with them to maintain it indefinitely
20:19:48  <TrueBrain> lol, I only now see we have: "original authors"
20:19:48  <TrueBrain> which for GPL would mean the original author of the work
20:19:48  <TrueBrain> not the one creating the derivative :D
20:19:49  <TrueBrain> not sure that is the intent :P
20:19:50  <andythenorth> "offer equivalent access to the Corresponding Source in the same way through the same place".... "If the place to copy the object code is a network server, the Corresponding Source may be on a different server"
20:20:15  <andythenorth> this is weak drafting
20:20:15  <FLHerne> TrueBrain: Maybe add "In case of GPLv3, the source must be available at this URL indefinitely or your content may be removed in future" ?
20:20:15  <andythenorth> either it's the same place, or it's not the same place
20:20:15  <andythenorth> don't specify a condition, then undermine it
20:20:18  <TrueBrain> FLHerne: meh .. lets not over-lawyer this
20:20:24  *** Hirundo has joined #openttd
20:20:24  *** ^Spike^ has joined #openttd
20:20:48  <FLHerne> True
20:20:50  <FLHerne> That would probably just provoke people to test it, tbh
20:20:50  <andythenorth> we don't need that clause
20:21:04  <andythenorth> author indicates compliance with GPL v3 (if that's what they're using) when they accept ToS
20:21:19  <FLHerne> Unless anyone reads this IRC discussion, no-one else is ever going to care
20:21:24  <andythenorth> if they drop the source from public, they're violating GPL v3
20:21:25  <FLHerne> (probably)
20:21:27  <andythenorth> what happens when authors die?
20:21:42  <DorpsGek_III> [OpenTTD/bananas-frontend-web] TrueBrain updated pull request #49: Add: introduce more clear guidelines in the use of GPL licenses
20:21:42  <andythenorth> who wrote this license?
20:21:46  <TrueBrain> some nitpicking in language ^^
20:21:47  <andythenorth> does it pass on to the estate in the will?
20:21:58  <andythenorth> oh was it Stallman?
20:21:58  <FLHerne> yes
20:22:02  <TrueBrain> mostly why I wanted to add this, was not the discussion of today, but the one with the dude that went mental on the forums
20:22:16  <FLHerne> yes
20:22:16  <TrueBrain> he was right in that it was unclear when uploading what GPL means
20:22:34  <FLHerne> I missed that
20:22:38  <TrueBrain> now those people can no longer say: we did not know we also had to distribute source
20:22:44  <TrueBrain> he wanted to get the source of GRFs, and the authors refused
20:22:48  <TrueBrain> he was .. not .. really polite
20:22:55  <TrueBrain> but it was GPL
20:22:55  <FLHerne> Oh, I see
20:22:59  <TrueBrain> they simply picked the first license
20:23:07  <TrueBrain> they really did not understand the license they picked
20:23:14  <TrueBrain> like .. really did not
20:23:17  <frosch123> [21:21] <andythenorth> what happens when authors die? <- you wait 80 years
20:23:23  <TrueBrain> it was an honest mistake of them
20:23:25  <FLHerne> That sounds like !fun
20:23:37  <andythenorth> frosch123 depending on jurisdiction :)
20:24:35  <TrueBrain> it was a typical: you are strictly seen correct, but the way you approach this, is not going to help anyone
20:24:46  <TrueBrain> as tt-forums is
20:25:39  <FLHerne> TrueBrain: anyway, fwiw, +1 for the current revision
20:25:45  <TrueBrain> cheers
20:26:07  <TrueBrain> is BSD etc not that demanding on source code btw?
20:27:15  <TrueBrain> it is not
20:27:16  <TrueBrain> funny
20:27:19  *** Hazzard has quit IRC
20:27:35  <frosch123> is the discussion done? TrueBrain: did you want to change "original author" -> "author"?
20:27:58  <TrueBrain> frosch123: I kinda do, but are there any implications?
20:28:27  <DorpsGek_III> [OpenTTD/bananas-frontend-web] TrueBrain updated pull request #49: Add: introduce more clear guidelines in the use of GPL licenses
20:28:28  <TrueBrain> I removed "original"
20:28:29  <TrueBrain> it just reads odd
20:28:38  <TrueBrain> like: the ones that came before, or what-ever
20:28:50  *** XeryusTC has joined #openttd
20:28:50  *** Yexo has joined #openttd
20:28:50  *** V453000 has joined #openttd
20:29:45  <frosch123> do we do us english? otherwise it should be "licence" with c, i think
20:30:22  <frosch123> i guess we use "license" in other places as noun
20:30:35  <andythenorth> I usually type license
20:30:42  <andythenorth> dunno which is correct
20:30:46  <DorpsGek_III> [OpenTTD/bananas-frontend-web] frosch123 approved pull request #49: Add: introduce more clear guidelines in the use of GPL licenses
20:30:49  <frosch123> ok, living languages :)
20:31:00  <andythenorth> lots of GB English was arbitrarily frenchi-fied at some point
20:31:05  <andythenorth> to make it seem sophisticated
20:31:10  <andythenorth> and less anglo-saxon
20:31:22  <frosch123> you mean beef instead of cowmeat?
20:31:23  <DorpsGek_III> [OpenTTD/grfcodec] FLHerne commented on pull request #9: Fix various issues with MinGW build
20:32:16  *** Hazzard has joined #openttd
20:33:32  <TrueBrain> frosch123: you mentioned that before, about license vs licence
20:33:38  <TrueBrain> but you never changed it, it seems :)
20:33:42  <TrueBrain> at least we are consistent :)
20:33:42  *** Ammler has joined #openttd
20:34:02  <Heiki>
20:34:35  <DorpsGek_III> [OpenTTD/bananas-frontend-web] TrueBrain merged pull request #49: Add: introduce more clear guidelines in the use of GPL licenses
20:35:00  <TrueBrain> right, so we can now put this baby to bed; andythenorth can sleep well, FLHerne can sleep well, I can sleep well .. what a beautiful world :)
20:35:49  <andythenorth>
20:36:02  *** planetmaker has joined #openttd
20:36:02  *** ChanServ sets mode: +o planetmaker
20:36:12  <andythenorth> "It notes that late-19th-century dictionaries “almost universally have license both for noun and verb, either without alternative or in the first place”, but insists that the s spelling “has no justification in the case of the noun”."
20:36:48  <andythenorth> GB English is fucked up by lots of people trying to retcon order onto it
20:36:52  <andythenorth> and making it worse
20:36:57  <andythenorth> does German or Dutch have this problem?
20:37:02  *** Osai has joined #openttd
20:37:02  *** avdg has joined #openttd
20:37:20  <TrueBrain> Dutch is more ... living
20:37:51  <TrueBrain> as in .. the dictionary is what we speak/write
20:37:55  <frosch123> andythenorth: both german and dutch have spelling reforms every 100 years
20:38:03  <frosch123> though we inserted a hotfix after the last one
20:38:06  <TrueBrain> as example, we used to have "cadeau", but these days it is just "kado"
20:38:26  <TrueBrain> you can, strictly seen, still write "cadeau", but ... no
20:38:36  <frosch123> usually the previous spelling remains accepted but deprecated until the next reform :p
20:38:36  <TrueBrain> and that is a change of the last .. what .. 20 years?
20:38:46  <TrueBrain> it is pretty fluent tbh
20:38:52  <TrueBrain> it is not like a moment in time
20:39:01  <TrueBrain> where one "time" begins and the other ends
20:39:04  <TrueBrain> or era
20:39:14  <TrueBrain> it is constant deprecation of words and creation of new
20:39:22  <FLHerne> Unlike Germany, where they have rules?
20:39:29  <frosch123> andythenorth: <- mind the hotfix in 2006 :)
20:39:30  <FLHerne> (or something)
20:39:42  <TrueBrain> I don't know much about German :P
20:39:51  <frosch123> andythenorth: also mind the "disputed" in a text about spelling reforms :)
20:39:53  <TrueBrain> except THAT YOU HAVE TO SPEAK LIKE THIS
20:39:54  <andythenorth> English does not do this reform :)
20:39:56  <FLHerne> frosch123's links was what I meant
20:40:19  <TrueBrain> we have purists over here too, that demand we speak "Proper Dutch"
20:40:24  <TrueBrain> but .... they are losing :P
20:41:13  <frosch123> <- look, there is even a category :)
20:41:34  <frosch123> i did not know about the 1944 one
20:42:02  <frosch123> maybe it was reverted or something, let's read
20:42:02  <frosch123> ah, yeah, "planned, but failed" :)
20:42:02  <TrueBrain> they used to publish a "book" in The Netherlands with the latest way of writing
20:42:17  <TrueBrain> but I haven't heard that in YEARS now :P
20:42:17  <TrueBrain> it was a yearly thing :P
20:42:25  <frosch123> we still have it, it's called "duden"
20:42:54  <frosch123> i have no idea how that company/institution interacts with laws on official languages :)
20:43:42  <TrueBrain> for a while we had 2 parties
20:43:47  <TrueBrain> the "green" book and "white" book
20:43:52  <TrueBrain> which both defined the new rules differently
20:43:54  <TrueBrain> that was FUN :D
20:44:22  <TrueBrain> newspapers were stating they used one or the other
20:44:58  <TrueBrain> LordAro: ugh, pyup commits are annoying indeed :D Stupid branch protection ..
20:45:37  <TrueBrain> hmm .. how to do this somewhat sane ..
20:45:50  <DorpsGek_III> [OpenTTD/grfcodec] glx22 commented on pull request #9: Fix various issues with MinGW build
20:47:32  <DorpsGek_III> [OpenTTD/bananas-frontend-web] TrueBrain updated pull request #48: Scheduled monthly dependency update for November
20:49:00  <glx> oh there is (and I still mostly not use 1990 version, because I think it's silly)
20:49:36  <DorpsGek_III> [OpenTTD/bananas-api] TrueBrain updated pull request #76: Scheduled monthly dependency update for November
20:49:43  <TrueBrain> okay, this is too labor intense .. lol ..
20:50:47  <DorpsGek_III> [OpenTTD/bananas-frontend-web] TrueBrain merged pull request #48: Scheduled monthly dependency update for November
20:53:21  <TrueBrain> sometimes I read funny jokes on the internet
20:53:21  <TrueBrain> "Not only Rust is immature, but it seems the language designers intentionally limited the language. There are a lot of poor programs misusing goto, so they just removed the operator: good for juniors, but too limited for professionals."
20:54:09  <TrueBrain> I wanna bet that who-ever wrote that won't do well in my teams :P
20:54:42  <glx> if you really need to use goto you have other issues :)
20:54:42  *** Gustavo6046 has quit IRC
20:55:25  <FLHerne> glx: re. PR -- well, I don't have a Windows box in use at all
20:55:29  <TrueBrain> you are either a really bad programmer, or you first tried regex :P
20:55:39  <FLHerne> Can I run minGW in Wine?
20:56:01  <LordAro> gotos have their uses
20:56:01  <FLHerne> I'm not sure that would be representative or useful :p
20:56:01  <FLHerne> In C, they can be good for error-handling
20:56:11  <FLHerne> But Rust has better ways of doing that
20:56:18  <LordAro> the uses are very rare, but to blanket say "do not use them" is naive
20:56:32  <LordAro> imo
20:56:49  <FLHerne> And in Rust, the borrow checker has a hard enough job without the insane control-flow you can create with gotos
20:57:05  <TrueBrain> LordAro: said by a true C-developer ;)
20:57:14  <LordAro> it is where i spend most of my time at the moment :p
20:57:28  <TrueBrain> it shows :)
20:57:28  <TrueBrain> in C, using gotos is fine .. often the only way
20:57:40  <TrueBrain> in C++ ..... I doubt it was what you meant to use
20:57:41  <TrueBrain> wanting to use it in Rust? You misunderstood the language :P
20:57:41  <LordAro> but yes, i can't (off hand) think of any good usecases for gotos in rust or c++
20:58:03  <LordAro> RAII & exceptions "fix" most use cases
20:58:03  <FLHerne> TrueBrain: If you're in grfcodec, you can use any C or C++ feature you feel like, in combination
20:58:18  <TrueBrain> I don't do C++, so I don't see the issue :P
20:58:27  <TrueBrain> I am the weirdo that wrote OpenDUNE in full ANSI-C (as in, C89)
20:58:32  <FLHerne> It has RAII of variadic argument contexts, using a class in a macro
20:58:39  *** Gustavo6046 has joined #openttd
20:58:47  <LordAro> TrueBrain: ew dirty
20:58:59  <LordAro> unless you actually wrote it before 1999 :p
20:59:11  <FLHerne> People say that C++ is a nice modern language encumbered by obsolete C things
20:59:30  <FLHerne> But I didn't realize how much that's true before reading grfcodec code
20:59:33  <LordAro> hehe
20:59:45  <FLHerne> It's amazing how insane the edge-cases of combining both sets of features get
20:59:45  <TrueBrain> LordAro: depends ... is 2009 before 1999?
21:00:10  <LordAro> not normally
21:00:13  <TrueBrain> I never understood C++ .. never tried to understand it
21:00:26  <TrueBrain> felt like a bandage on C
21:00:31  <TrueBrain> leave all the shit in, and build to make it "better"
21:00:47  <DorpsGek_III> [OpenTTD/bananas-frontend-web] TrueBrain created new tag: 1.0.6
21:01:11  <LordAro> sounds like someone who's not actually tries C++ in the last 9 years :p
21:01:11  <frosch123> TrueBrain: there are "modules" now, so sun on the horizon
21:01:11  <LordAro> tried*
21:01:11  <FLHerne> C++ is nice provided you don't let people write C in it
21:01:11  <TrueBrain> LordAro: as mentioned, that is a correct statement :)
21:01:24  <TrueBrain> LordAro: at least ADA now has a package manager!
21:01:44  <TrueBrain> it made me laugh so hard :)
21:01:44  <TrueBrain> Ada?
21:01:44  <TrueBrain> I think it is Ada, not?
21:02:07  <frosch123> modules will eventually result in a new language, that is abi compatible with c++, but drops the mistakes from the past 60 years
21:02:07  <LordAro> that does sound familiar
21:02:07  <LordAro> i don't think anyone has actually used it
21:02:24  <TrueBrain> it is new! As in, just released!
21:02:49  <LordAro> oh, they've actually released it
21:02:53  <LordAro> it's been in the works for a while
21:03:19  <TrueBrain> About Rust .. I really expected a similar experience as I had with C++, but after doing a decent project with it .. it really is a nice language
21:03:19  <TrueBrain> it really surprised me
21:03:26  <glx> usually with c++ it's "hmm there should be what I need somewhere in STL", until you find it's not available yet (unless in Boost)
21:03:52  <TrueBrain> you learn pretty quick how to deal with lifetimes
21:04:06  <TrueBrain> and I like it is a growing language; they are quick in adding new features :)
21:04:56  <DorpsGek_III> [OpenTTD/bananas-api] TrueBrain updated pull request #76: Scheduled monthly dependency update for November
21:04:56  <FLHerne> Integrating it with other buildsystems is a nightmare though
21:05:05  <frosch123> i wonder about the future of boost
21:05:05  <FLHerne> If you have a standalone Rust-only project it's fine
21:05:32  <frosch123> all the common boost things are now standard, or will be in c++23. it only contains weird stuff now
21:05:38  <DorpsGek_III> [OpenTTD/bananas-frontend-cli] TrueBrain updated pull request #14: Scheduled monthly dependency update for November
21:05:51  <TrueBrain> FLHerne: haven't tried that .. but cargo is nice
21:06:11  <TrueBrain> lol .. I only know boost as the shit-library you had to compile ... as in: took 2+ hours
21:06:14  <TrueBrain> that was "fun"
21:06:16  <TrueBrain> hmm .. Gentoo
21:06:20  <TrueBrain> that were good times
21:06:32  <TrueBrain> running 64bit before most other people knew what it was
21:06:33  <frosch123> TrueBrain: i compiled firefox, once
21:06:36  <TrueBrain> back in the days ....
21:06:46  <TrueBrain> hahaha, a mistake you also only make once :)
21:06:46  <glx> most of boost doesn't need compile
21:07:07  <glx> but a lot of space on HDD :)
21:07:23  <FLHerne> I have to compile QtWebEngine (basically Chromium) fairly often
21:07:35  <FLHerne> I got OOMs with 32GB of RAM before allocating some swap space
21:07:43  <DorpsGek_III> [OpenTTD/bananas-server] TrueBrain updated pull request #36: Scheduled monthly dependency update for November
21:07:51  <FLHerne> Modern web browsers are nuts
21:08:42  <DorpsGek_III> [OpenTTD/master-server] TrueBrain updated pull request #21: Scheduled monthly dependency update for November
21:09:14  <DorpsGek_III> [OpenTTD/master-server-web] TrueBrain updated pull request #15: Scheduled monthly dependency update for November
21:10:01  <DorpsGek_III> [OpenTTD/DorpsGek] TrueBrain updated pull request #38: Scheduled monthly dependency update for November
21:11:23  *** gelignite has quit IRC
21:11:45  <TrueBrain> okay, I think I have them all done now ... I will merge them tomorrow or something
21:14:24  <DorpsGek_III> [OpenTTD/team] frosch123 commented on issue #72: [pl_PL] Translator access request
21:15:00  <DorpsGek_III> [OpenTTD/bananas-server] TrueBrain updated pull request #36: Scheduled monthly dependency update for November
21:15:05  <DorpsGek_III> [OpenTTD/team] frosch123 commented on issue #73: [gl_ES] Translator access request
21:15:22  <DorpsGek_III> [OpenTTD/team] frosch123 commented on issue #74: [es_ES] Translator access request
21:15:35  <TrueBrain> hmm .. I wonder what pulls in typing-extensions==
21:15:39  <TrueBrain> as that is a bit of a weird extension
21:16:02  <TrueBrain> it is for 3.5 - 3.6, kinda
21:16:08  <TrueBrain> (Python 3.5 - 3.6)
21:17:04  <DorpsGek_III> [OpenTTD/master-server] TrueBrain updated pull request #21: Scheduled monthly dependency update for November
21:32:55  <DorpsGek_III> [OpenTTD/grfcodec] glx22 commented on pull request #9: Fix various issues with MinGW build
21:46:19  *** DasPoseidon has quit IRC
21:46:27  *** DasPoseidon has joined #openttd
21:48:42  *** frosch123 has quit IRC
21:52:20  <FLHerne> glx: Does yout CMake branch pass -Wall -Wextra to the compiler? Peter's branch doesn't seem to
21:52:44  <glx> probably not
21:52:49  *** nielsm has quit IRC
21:52:49  <FLHerne> That might explain the warnings discrepancy
21:53:00  <glx> I just made it support MSVC
21:53:24  <FLHerne> Did you make code changes for that, or just the buildsystem?
21:53:55  <glx> buildsystem and some changes in code
21:54:02  * FLHerne was trying to fix remaining gcc10 warnings, but the code generating them is just nuts
21:54:35  <FLHerne> Did you do anything to `apWrapper` in sanity_defines.h?
21:55:41  <glx> <-- my changes
21:56:21  <glx> <-- this is a funny one ;)
21:57:29  <andythenorth> how will 'num_vehs_in_consist' count articulated vehicles?
21:57:48  <FLHerne> glx: I think you just made the code I was looking at even weirder :p
21:58:17  <FLHerne> `va_start(ap.operator va_list&(),v);`  // MSVC complains without that call.
21:58:33  <FLHerne> what does it complain, and how does that solve it...?
22:02:29  <FLHerne> andythenorth: Pretty sure it should be 1 still
22:02:34  <andythenorth> I hoped so
22:03:03  <FLHerne> If it isn't, nml is buggy and we should fix it
22:04:54  <andythenorth> I think it's just too late to be writing code :P
22:05:26  <glx> FLHerne: because it can't convert apWrapper into va_list
22:06:18  <FLHerne> Despite there being a conversion operator to convert apWrapper to va_list?
22:07:04  <FLHerne> Eh, can't make it worse
22:07:31  *** jottyfan has quit IRC
22:08:02  <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth: i think it counts each vehicle part, but the specs should really clarify that
22:08:20  *** DasPoseidon has quit IRC
22:10:43  <FLHerne> I looked at the var 0x40 docs, they don't explicitly say either
22:11:37  <andythenorth> src will know
22:11:37  <andythenorth> I can code guesses until the result looks correct :P
22:12:27  <FLHerne> "Total number of vehicles in the consist, including shadow and rotor for aircraft.", but 4B says "Position of vehicle (articulated part) within the articulated vehicle" [singular]
22:12:57  <FLHerne> If 0x40 includes articulated parts, NML should work around that somehow...
22:13:10  <FLHerne> Hiding weird implementation details is sort of the point
22:13:48  * andythenorth drawing a weird autocoach
22:13:48  <Eddi|zuHause> i can't really imagine the original code from a decade ago skipping articulated parts
22:13:51  <andythenorth> not sure if it will work
22:14:02  <Eddi|zuHause> that variable probably predates articulated vehicles
22:14:05  <andythenorth> it's like SR gate stock, but in an LNER articulated style
22:14:35  <Eddi|zuHause> FLHerne: then there should be another variable
22:14:58  * FLHerne tries to find an nml project that actually uses it
22:15:16  <FLHerne> Eddi|zuHause: In NML, or grf interface?
22:15:24  <Eddi|zuHause> in grf specs
22:15:53  <Eddi|zuHause> it would be pretty much impossible for NML to do that
22:16:28  <FLHerne> CETS doesn't, DutchTrains doesn't
22:17:03  <Eddi|zuHause> probably DBSetXL uses it
22:17:16  <Eddi|zuHause> but that predates articulated vehicles as well
22:17:32  <Eddi|zuHause> actually, no, it does have some
22:21:00  *** Wolf01 has quit IRC
22:24:48  <andythenorth> hmm
22:25:38  * andythenorth wonders what position_in_consist_from_end produces 
22:25:50  <andythenorth> if last vehicle is articulated
22:27:45  <andythenorth> also in classic error, I was editing the wrong template
22:36:33  <andythenorth> well
22:37:02  * andythenorth will be rewriting some nml :P
22:41:59  <FLHerne> andythenorth: What was the answer?
22:42:00  <FLHerne> Or did you find different issues and get sidetracked?
22:42:29  <andythenorth> each part of an articulated vehicle counts for the total
22:42:29  <FLHerne> ugh
22:42:29  <andythenorth> I don't think it's automatically wrong
22:42:50  <FLHerne> (also, sorry)
22:43:06  <andythenorth> it just requires an alternative approach to calculating position from end
22:43:51  <FLHerne> I think it's automatically wrong, at least for the NML vars
22:44:40  <FLHerne> If position_in_consist_from_end of the last vehicle isn't 0, that's just wrong
22:45:45  <FLHerne> Hm, it does say "The position of the current vehicle-part from the start of the vehicle."
22:46:36  <andythenorth> as far as I can tell, given a 2 part articulated vehicle at the end of the consist
22:46:54  <andythenorth> position_in_consist_from_end will return 1 for part 0
22:46:57  <andythenorth> and 0 for part 1
22:47:10  * andythenorth might be wrong, I didn't conclusively prove it
22:47:16  <FLHerne> Hm, it does say "The position of the current vehicle-part from the start of the vehicle."
22:50:05  <FLHerne> I still think this is wrong, but it's probably too late now :-(
22:55:18  <andythenorth> well my code works now :)
22:55:27  <andythenorth> not sure if this articulated autocoach is a mistake
22:55:47  *** sla_ro|master has quit IRC
22:55:47  <andythenorth> but I wanted a 1-click vehicle with mail + pax
22:57:14  <andythenorth> FLHerne it was the SR birdcage things you posted that gave the idea :)
22:58:23  *** HerzogDeXtEr has quit IRC
23:02:49  <FLHerne> yay
23:04:47  <andythenorth> the inability to auto-replace articulated vehicles might make this unwise
23:04:53  <andythenorth> can only have one model
23:14:26  * andythenorth bed
23:14:26  *** andythenorth has quit IRC
23:33:40  <FLHerne> glx: Looking at the "block is not referenced" warnings when compiling FIRS, some of them look bogus at a quick glance :-/
23:34:32  <FLHerne> e.g. soda_ash_mine_tile_1_anim_control
23:34:58  <FLHerne> Oh, I just realized that there's a "Block 'soda_ash_mine_tile_1_anim_control' returns a constant, optimising." warning above that
23:35:26  <FLHerne> So it optimizes out the user, which makes the block not-referenced?
23:35:56  * FLHerne sleep now though. Tomorrow.
23:35:57  <FLHerne> (using IRC as convenient memory storage)
23:35:57  <glx> yeah not referenced existed before I added optimising
23:36:39  <glx> so when it's optimised, the call is replaced by return value, and the callee is no longer referenced
23:38:02  <FLHerne> Ok, that's probably solvable easily
23:38:12  <FLHerne> Do you know if it's the case that all ActionD variables should be constant throughout one grf execution, unless the code itself changes them?
23:38:28  <FLHerne> I asked frosch a while ago and got an answer I didn't understand :p
23:39:11  <glx> I think they should be constant if used as grf parameters
23:41:00  <FLHerne> I noticed that we're generating a lot of the same ActionD chains over and over
23:41:46  <FLHerne> And was wondering if we could reuse them when there isn't register pressure on the parameters
23:42:57  <FLHerne> Non-trivial to implement though, except some very simple cases
23:54:02  *** Progman has quit IRC

Powered by YARRSTE version: svn-trunk