Minetest Forums

Schematic Creator v1

A small, easy to execute Java application for creating schematics from blueprints.
Made by me to help you to create complex shapes.

Screenshots :

Spoiler

Using Colorful Lib :




(Painted by Leonid Afremov)

Features :

Spoiler

• Image/Depthmap preview
• Depthmaps
• Introducing .ams, a new schematic format
• Bonus : ams_loader mod !
• .anl, Node-Color assignments
• World Edit/.we file support
• Best approaching color

Changelog :

Spoiler

• v1 : First release

Instructions :

Spoiler

1. Nodelist Manual :
   This application comes with a

   Code: Select all

   wool.anl

   file. This file can be loaded to a color list representing wool.
   
   Mod Manual :
   Chatcommands :
   • set_ams_place_air <boolean> - should air be placed
   • place_ams <playername> <ams_file> - place an .ams file at playername's position
   • place_ams_at <x> <y> <z> <ams_file> - place an .ams file at a position
   Application Manual :
   • Make sure Java is installed(you know, this smoking coffee cup symbol)
   • Download the .zip
   • Unpack the .zip and copy the .jar file in any directory, install the node, get the .anl file for wool color table
   • Double-click to execute. If this doesn't work, try with "Open with". If it still does not work, make it executable (chmod + x in Unix)
   • Create an blueprint
   • Experiment to create your schematic!

License :

Spoiler

Java Application :
CC-BY-SA 3.0

Mod :
CC-BY-SA 3.0

.anl File :
CC-BY-SA 3.0

If you create Schematics with it, their licensing is up to you.

Download :
GitHub/Source :

Application


Please contact me if you find any bug.
Ideas for other helpful applications are also welcome.
Feel free to post your .anl and .ams here.
Leave a reply if you want to be informed about updates.

License :

(1) You may not apply reverse engineering, if I don't give you permission to.
(2) You may not fork, modify or distribute the application without explicit permission of the copyright holder(me).
(3) You may not sell or share/release this application under your name.
(4) That means you are allowed to share it if you do not claim it as yours.
(5) In general, you may not do anything excepting for regular use of this application without my permission.

Why?

Wuzzy wrote:

License :

(1) You may not apply reverse engineering, if I don't give you permission to.
(2) You may not fork, modify or distribute the application without explicit permission of the copyright holder(me).
(3) You may not sell or share/release this application under your name.
(4) That means you are allowed to share it if you do not claim it as yours.
(5) In general, you may not do anything excepting for regular use of this application without my permission.

Why?

Yes, why? That is in violation of the forum TOS, right?

@Wuzzy, @GreenDimond :
In general, every point says you need my permission for havin' a look at the source(Java is compiled!). But I have to admit that I may have to change some points. Make some suggestions, please ! And give reasons for them, of course !

That doesn't really explain why. :P

Basically, your license is draconian. For example, demanding us to not fork, ever is, well, not nice.
Asking us to not even look at the source code … hmm, I don't know if this is even legal (I am not a lawyer.).
Why do you think it is wrong to do these things you have forbidden? (This was a serious question.)

And you're posting this in a forum with a lot of free software zealots. ;-) Note that almost all software in these forums is free software. Many of use believe that sharing, forking, changing code are basic freedoms that everone should have. If everyone here would deny me or you these freedoms, it would be a much more hostile place, in which everyone basically just works for oneself. No code could be reused, everyone would be forced to do everything from scratch. Collaboration would be limited to discussion only. Frankly, I don't want this kind of “community”.

Basically I'm asking you to please show some respect to our community by choosing a free software license.
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html

As practical matter, I also recommend to not write your own license (like you did), but instead choose an existing one.
https://choosealicense.com/

The reason is that existing licenses have been tried and tested for a long time and written by people who understand these things much better than we do.

No one in their right mind will run that code not knowing what's going on behind the scenes. Unless they like rolling dice.

@ExeterDad : How many applications have you already installed ? 3 ? 10 ? 101 ? Have you taken a look at the whole source ? I am sure that there's at least one backdoor, used by a secret service, in your OS. Also, you must simply trust me that I am not uploading viruses. Consider : Why should I post it here, in a small forum ? Minecraft is way bigger ! There are so many places to release trojans, which are much more popular then this tiny forum ! Still not convinced ? If you want to, I can show you the NetBeans-Project...

Someone could have simply "asked" for the permissions, as stated. It seems as though the author is open to making changes in regards to the restrictions.

I will ad, however, if this is not code one plans to market and distribute for financial gain, then why so strict on licensing and/or permissions?
Although, it could just be that the author has put some considerable time and effort into this code, and does not wish someone else to turn around, take it, and use it for financial gain themselves (which does happen IRL)

I do think in some cases in the free/opensource software world, there are times when people need to make some exceptions when it comes to code license.
If something truly amazing were to be offered, which added some truly spectacular, or long awaited feature, yet the author wanted to protect their code from being taken by someone else, to make money with..., I am one who would be perfectly comfortable with a "No Commercial" use/gain license.

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/
I honestly feel the above license (check as there may be an updated version) should not be completely unacceptable within this community.
The reason is, as I explained. What if someone were able to give us certain features, such as the type of shaders many have voiced they would love to see, yet the author did not wish to release it without some protection?
The only downside, is code that may become deprecated and useless over time, if the author leaves the community or, fails to keep it updated with changes in development.
But, this could easily be addressed prior to release, under an agreement with developers that, if the author were to ever leave the community, etc., then code will need to be transfered to the community, but still remain under the same license, for reasons of maint.

If not, then the code might be considered already deprecated from the beginning, and therefore, useless to anyone from the start.

So LMD, please consider the above license. This way the code can be viewable, yet can also be under the protection you desire commercially. And then you may need to speak with the dev teams to look it over for release?

Source published !

Thank you. :-)

LMD wrote:application for creating schematics from blueprints.

I wish it was possible the other way round so I’d get blueprints from a schematic file :)

Linuxdirk wrote:

LMD wrote:application for creating schematics from blueprints.

I wish it was possible the other way round so I’d get blueprints from a schematic file :)

That is not easily possible using mts files, and .we files are way to big, so I invented .ams, but currently, there's no Exporter excepting this application.

LMD wrote:

Linuxdirk wrote: I wish it was possible the other way round so I’d get blueprints from a schematic file :)

That is not easily possible using mts files, and .we files are way to big, so I invented .ams, but currently, there's no Exporter excepting this application.

Both the .we and .mts file format are sufficiently documented. Reading .mts files is admittedly a bit more work. The .mts file format also supports probability, but that's more for mapgen and not for more or less static schematics and can mostly be ignored. The mapblocks stored in the database follow a very similar data structure. There are several external programs in several languages which can read at least the map file format. I'm not sure if it has already been done in Java. What advantages does your new .ams file format have?

Sokomine wrote:

LMD wrote:

Linuxdirk wrote: I wish it was possible the other way round so I’d get blueprints from a schematic file :)

That is not easily possible using mts files, and .we files are way to big, so I invented .ams, but currently, there's no Exporter excepting this application.

Both the .we and .mts file format are sufficiently documented. Reading .mts files is admittedly a bit more work. The .mts file format also supports probability, but that's more for mapgen and not for more or less static schematics and can mostly be ignored. The mapblocks stored in the database follow a very similar data structure. There are several external programs in several languages which can read at least the map file format. I'm not sure if it has already been done in Java. What advantages does your new .ams file format have?

Advantages :
- human readable & writable
- smaller than .we
- can be easily edited

.ams file format specifications :
Dimensions
2 2 2
Nodes
default:air, default:dirt
Schematic
1|0
0|1
0|1
1|0