Talk:Open Source Tools: Difference between revisions
Angry Beaver (talk | contribs) m (my vote) |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
---- | ---- | ||
I sign my name with great emphasis on this but i recognize any reluctance valve may have at there being 1000's of VHE clones that everyone all of a sudden expects them to deal with. While i want an open source approach to prevent any problems with millions of VHE clones i propose the compromise of a plugin system. Its eithier or, give me a plugin system or give me the source code. The current state of affairs cannot continue unless you devtoe a radical team to overhual VHE and dediated to keeping source tools running and new. And we all know how likeley that is. --[[User:Angry Beaver|Angry Beaver]] 20:27, 21 Jul 2006 (PDT) | I sign my name with great emphasis on this but i recognize any reluctance valve may have at there being 1000's of VHE clones that everyone all of a sudden expects them to deal with. While i want an open source approach to prevent any problems with millions of VHE clones i propose the compromise of a plugin system. Its eithier or, give me a plugin system or give me the source code. The current state of affairs cannot continue unless you devtoe a radical team to overhual VHE and dediated to keeping source tools running and new. And we all know how likeley that is. --[[User:Angry Beaver|Angry Beaver]] 20:27, 21 Jul 2006 (PDT) | ||
Maybe Valve would simply allow plugins to be posted online, like Mozilla's Add-on system. That way Valve would keep the source code, but users could get the functionality and versitility they want. | |||
On the prerequisite of owning Half-Life 2 to download the SDK, I don't think that it's really fair. For example, what if I only had Day of Defeat: Source to create maps for? Shouldn't I be able to use HWE too? (Maybe I'm wrong about this, but if I'm right, there you go :P) --[[User:Wizpig64|Wizpig64]] 01:42, 22 Jul 2006 (PDT) | |||
Revision as of 01:42, 22 July 2006
I do believe that some of the tools could be improved upon extensively if the community were allowed greater access. There's many talented people here, and rather than having to wait for the next major release from Valve for a minor bug fix, it'd be much easier for all parties concerned to implement the fix ourselves, and submit it for general release to the maintainers. --Spektre1 01:55, 21 Jul 2006 (PDT)
Having VHE as opensource would allow modders to make it more dynamic...of course this might also require the SDK to mount the mod's 'tool content' folder before the general SDK version. As for code submissions, it would be great if we could manage submissions by providing base version code as well as automatically diffpatched submissions with titles&descriptions...and provide an online 'view friendly' version (highlighting changes) as well as a downloadable (zip) version—ts2do 02:15, 21 Jul 2006 (PDT)
Great idea, I'll put my name on it. It would definitely do the community some good, considering the lack of regular updates to fix bugs (as Spektre said). Wraiyth 17:20, 21 Jul 2006 (PDT)
- Having VHE's Source code would really help alot. I think that making a new version of VHE using VGUI would really help out alot. And it would look better, I would totally help make a new version of Hammer.--Gameexpertmaster 18:04, 21 Jul 2006 (PDT)
I sign my name with great emphasis on this but i recognize any reluctance valve may have at there being 1000's of VHE clones that everyone all of a sudden expects them to deal with. While i want an open source approach to prevent any problems with millions of VHE clones i propose the compromise of a plugin system. Its eithier or, give me a plugin system or give me the source code. The current state of affairs cannot continue unless you devtoe a radical team to overhual VHE and dediated to keeping source tools running and new. And we all know how likeley that is. --Angry Beaver 20:27, 21 Jul 2006 (PDT)
Maybe Valve would simply allow plugins to be posted online, like Mozilla's Add-on system. That way Valve would keep the source code, but users could get the functionality and versitility they want. On the prerequisite of owning Half-Life 2 to download the SDK, I don't think that it's really fair. For example, what if I only had Day of Defeat: Source to create maps for? Shouldn't I be able to use HWE too? (Maybe I'm wrong about this, but if I'm right, there you go :P) --Wizpig64 01:42, 22 Jul 2006 (PDT)