[Mod] Homtcommands

[homthack]

Hello, I am working with the wip mods with a new package for a new mods called homtcommands, I think it's a people that have an old file but now a new package to see a new folder that brings a new admin program that name can be put in a good command. you can download now and if you do not download it then ask a topic you can ask

Mods folder

+ Spoiler

homtbadname
homtchats
homtcursing
homtexternal_cmd
homtextras
homtjail
homtnametag
homtprivs
homtspawn
homtspawn_cmd
homtwatch

Download links.
https://github.com/homt8/homtcommands/a ... master.zip
Browse code on github.
https://github.com/homt8/homtcommands

Licence.
DWYWPL

Have Fun.

[homthack]

Update readme.rnd for a package homtcommands, just ask who else.

[Shara]

What you call homtspill is one of my mods, hosted on the cat5 account. Its readme includes a notice saying the code is not to be duplicated outside the cat5 repository. You have no right to re-license it.It is not public domain as you claim.

Learn to respect conditions people place on use of their mods.

Several of the other mods appear to be direct copies of mods Don Batman created, also for cat5's TPS servers.

It looks like none of this is your own work.

Even the readme is a direct copy of the https://github.com/Cat5TV/myadmin readme with the authors' names and a few other bits removed, and you adding that you are the owner.

[Linuxdirk]

Even the readme is a direct copy of the https://github.com/Cat5TV/myadmin readme with the authors' names and a few other bits removed, and you adding that you are the owner.

The license file in the directory states that the stuff is under DO WHAT YOU WANT TO PUBLIC LICENSE which states "You are allowed to do whatever you want to with what content is using this license.".

[Shara]

Dirk, my spill mod was NOT included in that TPS repo, but in another, where the readme specifically states the mod "is not to be distributed outside Cat5TV/tps_spill github page. "

Note how the part you quote comes after I say "Several of the other mods.."?

So no, homthack doesn't have the right to do whatever he likes with that mod.

As for the other mods included - I have not said he's gone against any license for them. However I'm calling him out on it anyway, and if you think it's fine to claim yourself owner of someone else's work just because they were kind enough to use a permissive license, I'm happy to simply disagree with your take on things.

[Linuxdirk]

I guess we all agree that this whole thread is bullshit with stuff that was ripped off from several other projects. There is nothing to discuss that "Homtcommands" is a giant copyright infringement that was reported already ...

But the thing you specifically mentioned is absolutely fine with the license it is released under.

[Shara]

I guess you were typing while I was editing the above post to add something, so apologies if you missed what I added.

But to be clear, I did not claim he broke any license on the other mods. That was an observation, because I feel when you claim to be the owner of a thing you didn't make, you should get called out on it. It might be legally fine, but it's still not fine beyond that.

[Linuxdirk]

because I feel when you claim to be the owner of a thing you didn't make, you should get called out on it. It might be legally fine, but it's still not fine beyond that.

Yes, and therefore I prefer GPL version 3 over more permissive licenses. Because when the license allows to do whatever one wants, one will do whatever one wants ...

[Shara]

Or in the case of some people, they will do whatever they want anyway. :)

[homthack]

it's fine I'm sure that homtspill is already deleted in this case inside mods and the homtspill page was deleted and now I'm agreed that homtcommands in information that can give another topic...

[Shara]

Thank you.

[Wuzzy]

What you call homtspill is one of my mods, hosted on the cat5 account. Its readme includes a notice saying the code is not to be duplicated outside the cat5 repository. You have no right to re-license it.It is not public domain as you claim.

Learn to respect conditions people place on use of their mods.

1. Why are you so hostile?
2. Why did you choose to make your software proprietary in the first place?
3. Doesn't this kind of behaviour go against the (free) spirit of Minetest?

[rubenwardy]

Because they ripped off one of her mods with no care for attribution or copyright? And this isn't the first time this user has done something wrong

[Shara]

wuzzy, quite honestly, you're the hostile one.

The mod in question is one that I made for my server, and allowed someone else to publish for use on their servers on the condition it doesn't go further (they update from github, so need to have it there to use). I'm not under any obligation to share it. I'm certainly not obligated to let someone else stick whatever license they want on it while not even giving me credit. It's a bit worse when the person in question has also done quite a few other things as well, but I choose not to raise that here.

The reason I originally didn't want to publish this mod? Quite simply, it's a mess and can be done better. I usually keep my mods private until such a time as I consider them ready for use outside my own server. This one wasn't ready, but as explained above, needed to be on github so someone I'd made an exception for could use it.

I was working on a proper public version of spill that would have been released under MIT, but lack of spare time and attitudes of certain people have really sapped my will to work on it or even to publish what I have so far.

Doesn't this kind of behaviour go against the (free) spirit of Minetest?

I'd personally like to think the "spirit of Minetest" includes at least a little respect for the time and effort people put into what they make. So please quit trying to berate me for wanting conditions I set on my work to be respected.

[Wuzzy]

You have to understand I am a free software zealot. :-)

Well my view on this is the following:

If the word “freedom” bears any meaning, then I think the following things are true:
1) Nobody is under any moral obligation to publish or share their cration. In this point I agree with you.
2) But if 1) is true, then nobody under any moral obligation to obey each of the author's wishes. If your freedom (as an author) means denying the freedom of everyone else, then yes, I am opposed to that kind of “freedom”. Your freedom does NOT become less just because someone else does not comply with your conditions
3) The whole concept of “asking for permission” is deeply authotaritan and only makes sense in a proprietary / copyright context.
4) Collaboration between people is optional, but is not enforcable. Collaboration is also not the point of free software
5) The end result is what counts most. The concept on ownership on any kind of data is just an illusion / invention anyway. It's a widespread illusion, but an illusion nonetheless.

Like it or not, as soon you post anything in the Internet, it de facto belongs to the Internet, which means it will be copied, shared, changed, ridiculed and yes, even misattributed. This is just one of the basic Internet facts.

The only moral rights which authors have in my opinion is to fight back against plagiarism. If you simply had wanted to point out that the claimed authorship here was a flat out lie, then I would have not taken issue. Misattribution is wrong, and should be fixed. Simply using code someone else has written is not inherently wrong in my opinion.

Saying that I am the hostile one here is silly, when all I did was just asking some uncomfortable questions.

Also, please don't forget the context of Minetest here. Minetest is a free software alternative to Minecraft. The “free software” aspect is it's main selling point. The point of free software is to move away from this permission society, and yes, I also think this is a community thing.

Quite simply, it's a mess and can be done better.

I do not judge you for your code, nor do I judge you to not wanting to share your code in the first place.
But I do judge you for pissing on people for posting stuff in the forums. ;-)

So please quit trying to berate me for wanting conditions I set on my work to be respected.

This won't happen.
The only kind of respect you get from me is the realization that you have done work. Nobody can take that away from you, and neither can I.
But what you will not get from me is obedience. :P

[Shara]

wuzzy, stop turning this into something it's not. I know people will do whatever they like whenever they like. However I'll also stand up when someone goes against the terms set in something I release and do what I like about that as well.

I'm not sure where you're pulling half of this stuff from because it really isn't relevant, and I'm not here to be preached at about ownership. A lot of the time it's people like you who put others off contributing anything at all, because you're so all or nothing you make anyone who might be in the middle ground want to find the nearest rock to hide under. It's not welcoming at all. If you want people to share your ideals, maybe try being a teeny bit more gentle.

Now move along and be a zealot where it's not totally offtopic. homthack did as asked, so I have no issue with him here or his mod. You are basically just littering his thread with something that is now totally unrelated.

[paramat]

Just to clarify this point:

> But the thing you specifically mentioned is absolutely fine with the license it is released under.
> Dirk, my spill mod was NOT included in that TPS repo, but in another, where the readme specifically states the mod "is not to be distributed outside Cat5TV/tps_spill github page."

This was something that tripped me up at first, for a moment it looked like spill mod was under DWYWPL.

Wuzzy you're being ridiculous. And your unpleasant extremist free software opinions are irrelevant here because the code is under a particular license which has to be respected irrespective of anyone's personal opinions about licensing or ownership.
The reasons for the restriction on that mod have been explained and seem very reasonable, and nothing that goes against the spirit of MT, certainly not anything that seems proprietary.

[Wuzzy]

Haha, I just realized we're debating about … wait for it … wait for it … a grand total of 108 lines of simple Lua source code. :D

https://github.com/Cat5TV/tps_spill/blo ... r/init.lua

Also, this code looks very easy, no complex algorithms here. Anyone with a bit of Lua skill could have written that.
I know respecting authorship is important and all, but … for this? Get real.

Best of all, most of this code—for some reason—looks really similar to the bucket mod from Minetest Game. Look for yourself:

https://github.com/Cat5TV/tps_spill/blo ... r/init.lua
https://github.com/minetest/minetest_ga ... t/init.lua

So some of these 108 lines might not even be written by Shara. Ahem. So much for “stealing authorship and slapping a license on top”.

Look: All I'm saying here is that it would be really nice if you are a little bit less strict on your conditions at least for such tiny pieces of code.

IMO re-using code is not a bad thing, the freedom to re-use code is what makes this modding community so great. It has served the community very well for years. Also keep in mind that free software mods are the norm here. Only a tiny minority actively insists on proprietary.

[Linuxdirk]

Even if it completely lacks originality it is still properly licensed within a non-free project.

[Shara]

And your opinion is reason to go on and on and on about something off topic and irrelevant?

I agree the fuss around this is ridiculous, but what it makes ridiculous is you blowing it out of all proportion and using it as a platform to preach your personal views. It's a ridiculously simple mod. There are alternatives available. You like freedom? Great, so do I! (Hint: go check the licenses on all mods released on my own profile). Doesn't mean you can enforce your views on everyone else or that it's fine for you to continue to be offtopic here.

Edit: Also asking Cat5 to remove the mod. I don't work on things, regardless of how simple they are or otherwise, for this.