$12256 / $11500
in open source, we have different types of licences that in general allow modification, which in turn creates github and other hosters, with mechanics like forking/branching.
So question is - do you consider implementing such mechanics?
I would be happy if i could fork someone else model, and tweak it, lets say the scenario is that i objectively want to make it better, rework face or something.
So i do that, redo some part and the i issue a "pull request" and original author decides to merge my version into his, basically replacing his website entry with version 2, and have the version one in history that is easily accessible.
Also have on the original menu showing all forks, and so on, basically this would make this website truly stand to his name, as currently its just a place to upload your free stuff. (i understand your intent, fully open licence, do what you want).
This website's content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
The gist I am getting from this site is that there are only a few people with access to the code and they are too busy to impliment new features right now.
Code? It sounds like pointcache is talking about forking art assets.
What kind of advantages would an automatic branching of artwork provide? Sounds interesting. Derivatives are certainly allowed, but it's currently a somewhat manual process; "here is some new art. I derived it from Kenny's set. Mention me, and also Kenny, in the credits" sort of thing.
--Medicine StormTo answer the question: such a feature has definitely been considered. I don't know how high up it is on the priority list.
By the way, I did get in touch with Bart recently, and he is alive. Apparently among other things he's been working on the spam filter, which seems to be working somewhat better now.
All CC licenses on this site allow for derivative works (including modding) as it could be successfully argued that the game is a derivative work of the artwork.
I'm not a lawyer but according to my understanding:
CC-BY-SA is like the GNU licenses where all derivative work must be licensed the same and where you clearly state what modifications you made and attribute all others who worked on it before.
CC-BY requires that you attribute all others who worked on it before in a way where it is clear which part they worked on
CC-0 is public domain and doesn't require any attributions, although they are nice
Proper attrictuion can easily be done in the attribution box and is probably more useful than forking on the developer end, as if the work is included the game we have to state in writing the entire line of artists / musicians who worked on the artwork and a text description of what they did, so it is useful if you can write the contributions you made.
Yeah i specificly wrote in op post that i understand the licensing model here so you dont have to spend time explaining me what i already know.
The easier it is and the less painless it is for artists to donate the more likelyhood that they will come back. Doing forks and merging takes added time and added responsibility to the donater and make things more difficult for the donater. I dont think the added responsibility to the donater is worh it.