[NQ Unofficial 1.2.3] 2 Primary Weapons (MP40 & Thompson)

(Nail) #41

[QUOTE=crapshoot;208288]it doesn’t matter how much code changed, it still shouldn’t be released as NQ. it’s an unofficial branch off of old code. what if several people started adding a feature that took one minute max to add (like this) and started releasing as NQ version xxx? it’s a support nightmare. are people looking for support on the NQ site supposed to now specify that they are using so and so’s slight modification?

the intentions were obviously good here and nobody has a problem with modification of the code. there is undoubtedly several servers running with slight modifications and thats fine too. the only issue here is that it is publicly released / distributed as NQ. altering the name seems to me like a simple and reasonable request.

the only reason the source was freely available for as long as it was is because of Irata. you should at least show some sort of gratitude by repspecting his wishes.[/QUOTE]

I’d have to agree

(Paul) #42

“It shouldn’t be released as NQ”, oke, so for 2 lines of code I need to call it paulmod or something? In another directory so all people have to download the NQ bins/files 2 times? That’s really nonsense, and about support stuff… Well it is still NQ, nothing changed further and everything does work. Why would they ask about new features that arent’there?

(Avoc) #43

I’d rather not get into this entire thing, but isn’t this something like if I made a map, and released it, and someone decided to change the .script of that map and release it? Or well, the .script of a older version of said map?

(Rudi) #44

No.

Since this is officially “No Quarter Double Guns Extension”, this is exactly the same as somebody releasing a grass varient of Fuel Dump.

The simple fact is that the mod is only available from this single site, which includes exactly what’s changed, exactly how to use it, and clearly states that it’s not an official NQ build. Since this is also only targetted to server admins - There’ll be no problems, and everyone knows that.

(stealth6) #45

human stupidity is infinite, I can easily see this coming up on the NQ forums.

for instance:
-Hey I saw people with 2 guns on a server how did they do that.
or
-Where can I turn on double gun wielding
or
-what is the lua script to enable double gun wielding

etc…

People aren’t all as sharp and won’t notice the ‘unofficial’ so they will go to the main NQ site with their questions.

Now if 100 people do the same thing and make these unofficial release I think you can imagine the mayhem that will ensue.

(aaa3) #46

maybe calling it (teh pk3s et c) similar to NQ-d or NoQuarter-d or NoQuarter_123dwg or wtf smth that? again, just a wild idea

p.s.

[QUOTE=crapshoot;208288]
the only reason the source was freely available for as long as it was is because of Irata. you should at least show some sort of gratitude by repspecting his wishes.[/QUOTE]
maybe a late realise on my part, but, sadly, its a must-admit, this strikes, a bit…

well i stick to the “a bit” though, as sometimes stuff just dont going on a path open source authors envisioning them, and as long as the legal is ok, its just shouldnt be possible in every such case to get the unwanted/disagreed/etc fork stopped… but whatever, it never hurts to trying to be reasonable and nice towards teh creators either (this can include a lots of things)…
just a very general musing on the wider issue

(Paul) #47

There are no pk3’s because it’s only server side, for all clients nothing changes, they don’t download anything. And server so’s / qagame are loaded into the game with a hardcoded name, you can’t change that.

(aaa3) #48

oh i see. then, the package(“zip”, 7z, rar etc) name of the release maybe; and title visible on the home page… (that is, how you officially call the mod and referring to it)
or whatever

but thats why was the etc after it, for such cases :stuck_out_tongue: btw.
&last post edited, u reply far too quickly:)

(Paul) #49

You should first type your post and then press post XD

But why I packed it in .zip? Well cuz all people wanted me to put a readme saying replace the bins :slight_smile: First it were only direct links too bins, but now these are put into zip :slight_smile:

(aaa3) #50

[QUOTE=Paul;208359]You should first type your post and then press post XD
But why I packed it in .zip? Well cuz all people wanted me to put a readme saying replace the bins :slight_smile: First it were only direct links too bins, but now these are put into zip :)[/QUOTE]
i always edit :stuck_out_tongue:
forgot things, additional things to say, et c.

but about readme, yeah, somebody said earlier u dont need a readme for a 2 line modification.
and i dont agree. i think u just cant release anything just into the wild rawly (except when its a challenge to find out whats there or publishing stuff to a very … er… bright audience, who might take it as offense to have anything explained, lawl; but a game mod and map, very far from this shit)… u dont have to call it readme (exs: file.id, info.txt), it dont have to be long, a few words sometimes, but smth is better to be there. i also prefer nonzip but thats only working with maps caus them having a pk3 and i can put there everything i want even pictures banners promo shots html etc. when stuff liek this, u cant really avoid a pack.

p.s.: edited, of course : ) re reading, small refinements, clarifications, minimal fixings to [toomuch-]broken english, et c

a p.s. again; realized just now after typing the post, its not only “cant really” but “cant”, forgot about legal and only thought about general changes etc readmes, in alone enough, when wrote this.:
oh and in many (actually, most(?)) freelibreopensource thing; its (this avoiding the zip thing) just something u cant afford since the license must be there for example even with the permissive stuff iirc, but idk

(zbzero) #51

In my opinion this request made by Irata have no sens, if the NQ Team provide the source code for public why ppls cant change like they want??
ET its a free game, everyone can download it and play for free if NQ team not want any modification of the code didnt provide the source like Etpro Team did.

(aaa3) #52

@zb

[QUOTE=zbzero;208361]In my opinion this request made by Irata have no sens, if the NQ Team provide the source code for public why ppls cant change like they want??
ET its a free game, everyone can download it and play for free if NQ team do not want any modification of the code shouldn’t provide the source, like Etpro Team.[/QUOTE]

if this, in your view, includes releasing bare *.so / et c. files without anything accompanied; then you dont understand free software/open source.

dont misunderstand me; i’m also on this mod’s side; but thats just something cant be done and is a very unnice thing.
such idiotic posts only fuel the fire

late edit, didnt want to make a new post for this, [OFF]media b*tching;at opening post. although i wonder, why such a simple page had to be made php, instead of a simple xhtml[/OFF]

(stealth6) #53

this :stroggtapir:

(Rudi) #54

[QUOTE=stealth6;208350]human stupidity is infinite, I can easily see this coming up on the NQ forums.

for instance:
-Hey I saw people with 2 guns on a server how did they do that.
or
-Where can I turn on double gun wielding
or
-what is the lua script to enable double gun wielding

etc…

People aren’t all as sharp and won’t notice the ‘unofficial’ so they will go to the main NQ site with their questions.

Now if 100 people do the same thing and make these unofficial release I think you can imagine the mayhem that will ensue.[/QUOTE]

Perhaps Paul should simply modify his own license saying it may not be redistributed.

That would solve every problem that people seem to outline in this thread.

Legally, he’s not breaking any license. With regards to human stupidity, keeping a single source of distribution will solve it. Then we’re all happy.

(Paul) #55

With this sentence, I want to apologise for the support in the future for NQ 1.2.3. I can try to help, my contact is in the webpage. I’m really sorry about this.

Also, I feel young again of the compliment irata gave me :smiley:
“now a teenager spreads undocumented non fitting NQ licence files arround the net. Maybe time for something new …”.
Great, I’m still a teenager :smiley:

Read More from irata

(stealth6) #56

arrogance ftl

(shagileo) #57

Maybe you just could’ve send them a suggestion to make a little build for a double weapon option.
Then they’re the ones editing their mod and the people who want a double gun are happy too.
If it’s just a two line edit, I’m (pretty) sure they would’ve created it. (although I don’t really know the NQ modding team, but 2 lines edit isn’t really that big of a job)

Although I mostly agree with Rudi’s posts.

Hides in dark caves again

(S.S.20grit) #58

Hi there,

Just a bit of information for those following this. Our forums are constantly over run with questions from people regarding No Quarter. For quite some time we dealt with people and their 2.55 issues. Since 1.2.5 those questions have mercifully stopped. Now I see there being waves of questions coming from people having issues with slightly modified versions of No Quarter. As far as I am concerned, there will be no support for problems related to any of these versions as well.

Someone may get lucky and get a question answered. But i seriously doubt it.

(aaa3) #59

and i (we?) think thats perfectly okay. why would anyone want different? its obvious u dont have to support these spawns; those who can use these can have fun, and the stupid will suffer. and as for the predictable hordes of ppl flooding your forum, if i were the maker of the mod, i’d simply ask to delete on sight any topic or post which is related to my mod accompanied by an apologisement for this consequence. (but would release my mod nevertheless)

and i mean not just this particular mod, but really any tinkering with outdated/unsupported/1.2.3/2.55 stuff. given the above, its a little bit ununderstandable and sad for me why u r so hostile towards modding 123. (apart from that mass contamination by idiotic questions, but that can be cut short by making clear to anyone that u only dealing with most recent (125) stuff and 255-ers are gtfo. and i think if any1 would think this is not natural and all right and would demand othewise, hes a moron to be disregarded)

[QUOTE=S.S.20grit;208440]Hi there,

Just a bit of information for those following this. Our forums are constantly over run with questions from people regarding No Quarter. For quite some time we dealt with people and their 2.55 issues. Since 1.2.5 those questions have mercifully stopped. Now I see there being waves of questions coming from people having issues with slightly modified versions of No Quarter. As far as I am concerned, there will be no support for problems related to any of these versions as well.

Someone may get lucky and get a question answered. But i seriously doubt it.[/QUOTE]

(S.S.20grit) #60

oh, i’m not being hostile. I’m simply stating that support won’t be given back to a certain point on the forums. (i’m assuming no quarter has really moved way beyond our forums anyway and most of the people coming there for support just happened to see the s.s. stuff come up in game.)

I do think that anyone making a modification to no quarter and distributing that mod should have to alter the mod name i.e. abc nq mod so that people will know they’re using an altered mod.