I also notice that the entry form requires "GNU GPL version 3 or later", while the rules only mentioned "GNU GPL 3.0". Not happy either.
On second thought, I am not a native speaker. Is "all my software source code is GNU GPL version 3 or later" satisfied by the code being licensed under GPLv3 (because the version nmumber 3.0 is greater or equal to 3)? That would be fine, of course ;-)
If the requirement is in fact to add the "or later" clause to the GPL, then it is impossible to use new original content based upon art phase content by other people: We did not receive the art phase content under the GPLv3+, only under GPLv3. Even the base assets are not GPLv3+ (except for the demo), so any art phase content based upon base assets which in fact was licensed GPLv3+, was done so illegally.
I am not going to start early, but I might reuse code from previous projects not yet published/annouced anywhere: http://www.weyer-zuhause.de/mark/software/anatris_0.0.tgz http://www.weyer-zuhause.de/mark/software/oinm_0.0.tgz
Also, there is some code I use to test animations during the art phase, which I might want to reuse later. I don't want to publish all of it early so as not to spoil any surprise. (Obviously, I won't reuse the parts I don't want to prepublish.) Would it be sufficient to upload a tarball which contains all code minus (the OCaml equivalent of) the main.cpp somewhere? Or would it even suffice to include that code in my art phase entry?
I also notice that the entry form requires "GNU GPL version 3 or later", while the rules only mentioned "GNU GPL 3.0". Not happy either.
On second thought, I am not a native speaker. Is "all my software source code is GNU GPL version 3 or later" satisfied by the code being licensed under GPLv3 (because the version nmumber 3.0 is greater or equal to 3)? That would be fine, of course ;-)
If the requirement is in fact to add the "or later" clause to the GPL, then it is impossible to use new original content based upon art phase content by other people: We did not receive the art phase content under the GPLv3+, only under GPLv3. Even the base assets are not GPLv3+ (except for the demo), so any art phase content based upon base assets which in fact was licensed GPLv3+, was done so illegally.
I am very unhappy as well.
The broken name is done automatically by OGA. After downloading, rename the file to caeles.tar.gz or caeles.tgz.
Apparently, I forgot to mention the .xcf versions in the README. So here we go:
The directory xcfs contains layered versions of some images.
I am not going to start early, but I might reuse code from previous projects not yet published/annouced anywhere:
http://www.weyer-zuhause.de/mark/software/anatris_0.0.tgz
http://www.weyer-zuhause.de/mark/software/oinm_0.0.tgz
Also, there is some code I use to test animations during the art phase, which I might want to reuse later. I don't want to publish all of it early so as not to spoil any surprise. (Obviously, I won't reuse the parts I don't want to prepublish.) Would it be sufficient to upload a tarball which contains all code minus (the OCaml equivalent of) the main.cpp somewhere? Or would it even suffice to include that code in my art phase entry?
EDIT: the animation testing code is fully (minus nothing) included in my entry:
http://opengameart.org/content/lpc-caeles-art
Pages