zoot

And without leading spaces resourceicons-wo-comma-space.diff resource-icons-small3.tar.gz

If the commas are dropped, you get this: resourceicons-wo-comma.diff

The 'hovering' appearance is actually due to the icons being naively downscaled (by me), which leaves some barely visible edges. If I crop them more aggressively, I get this: resource-icons-small2.tar.gz

It makes it easier to find the cost info at a glance, as suggested here.

For some reason, the icons do not show up under the "Insufficient resources" heading, but I suspect that is a separate bug:

I've replaced resource names with resource icons in tooltips: resourceicons.diff resource-icons-small.tar.gz

I can't seem to login on Trac, so I'll ask here: Deiz, what would in your view be the cleanest way to update that graphic per frame instead of per turn? It seems sad not being able to do so for UI stuff.

Yeah, for hotkeys that's probably fine. I'm less sure about text entry like chat and player names - if serveurix presses 'A' will an A actually show up, or will it be Q or some other character? But that will probably come up in testing, if it is an issue at all.

If you think about it, using English keyboards isn't much different in that you generally press Shift before every letter after a period. The French has just come up with a way to help people remember to do so IMO supporting different keyboard layouts is relatively important as far as internationalization goes. Probably even more important than translation, because you can just look up the few expressions you need and get on with the game, but not being able to set waypoints and the like keeps being a limitation/nuisance/handicap.

Actually, I didn't You seemed to be saying that we need to cite sources if we use someone's original analysis. People seem frustrated enough with copyright law as it is, so I wanted to make clear that citing sources is not an additional area we need to be paranoid about.

Let's be sure to keep those two things apart. Whether or not 0 A.D. should live up to scholarly standards can be discussed, but abiding by the law IMO is indispensable.

It doesn't seem feasible to change license at this point, because so many contributions under the GPL have been integrated into the game, with the authors long gone, so we can't ask them to relicense them. But according to this, the Apache License 1.0 is DFSG (Debian) compatible. So, if people want to do it, it ought to be possible to include a clause of this type on the artwork, without anyone complaining too much: * 3. All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this * software must display the following acknowledgment: * "This product includes software developed by the Apache Group * for use in the Apache HTTP server project (http://www.apache.org/)." (Obviously substituting product names etc. as appropriate.) (Edit: The FSF would complain if they could, though.)

Just to be clear: that's a citation, not an attribution. Copyright law doesn't require you to provide citations.

As far as I know, paraphrasing should be fine, at least for common-knowledge encyclopedic information. Unlike patents which do cover more general ideas, copyright is more concerned with the particular expressions of ideas. Other than that, I agree - the "fine toothed comb" is the right way to think about. Deiz, I didn't suggest "threatening," or even friendly nudging, anyone on the basis of anything that is already in the release. I said it should be a considered a fairly serious transgression going forward, as opposed to now where it's almost raising the issue on the forum that can get you into trouble I can't really blame Spahbod for committing those bits of text, because as far as I can tell, he hasn't even been faced with the form that asks him to agree to release all his work on 0 A.D. under a free license, let alone one requiring him to attest to only submit his own work. And that's the point - it's not that Spahbod committed some texts from Wikipedia, it's the lack of awareness.

I've been in that mode. It stinks

Yes, seems a good way to go.

Myconid: I didn't say they aren't taking the law seriously. I said people who are making additions to the releases need take it bit more seriously to avoid problems in Hungary and elsewhere in the future. But read into it whatever you want

I didn't mean to insinuate anything, I'm just concerned that not everyone are conscious of these things because they fall prey to the type of reasoning majapahit expresses. Rainbows and unicorns have no bearing whatsoever on whether a project is guilty of IP infringement or not. If you look at sites like Wikipedia they have detailed licensing information on every piece of media in their database. This allows them to defend themselves against exactly the type of accusations you describe, because it allows their lawyers to take the necessary precautions ahead of time. It lets them root out the unicorns before they fail to show up in court, so to speak. For instance, you cite fair use. This is a typical misunderstanding that can be addressed this way. Fair use laws varies widely from jurisdiction to jurisdiction and in many countries outside of the U.S., the concept is not recognized in law at all. It's entirely possible that a judge in Europe somewhere would come to the conclusion that including ~20 files that copies verbatim passages from as many copyrighted works would be stretching any sense of "fair use" he might have. So you can say: screw that judge - who cares about Hungarian (or whatever) gamers anyway, right? Sure, you can. Point is - are you the one who should make that decision? No, you aren't. It's the project - its leadership if you will - who should make that decision. And the only way they stand a chance of doing so is if everyone make a good faith effort to make it clear when they are adding potentially infringing content to the release, instead of (intentionally or not) slipping it in in the guise of rainbows and unicorns. I don't buy into this fatalist idea that once someone points a false accusation at you, it's over. Deflecting such claims just requires a bare minimum of preparation.

Yup.

Here's a couple of problematic files I just found: http://trac.wildfire...aegean_sea.json This file contains snippets from the Wikipedia article about the Aegean Sea. Contrary (perhaps) to popular belief, Wikipedia articles are not public domain. They are licensed under CC-BY-SA 3.0 and proper attribution and licensing notices must be given in the game if they are used. See here what that means. http://trac.wildfire...pine_lakes.json This file contains snippets from the Wikipedia articles titled Alps and History of the Alps. http://trac.wildfire...ine_valley.json Same as the above. http://trac.wildfire...an_plateau.json This file contains snippets from the Wikipedia article titled Anatolia. http://trac.wildfire...rchipelago.json This file contains snippets from the Wikipedia article titled Archipelago. http://trac.wildfire...nes_forest.json This file contains snippets from the Wikipedia article titled Ardennes. etc. (I don't mean to single out Spahbod here, these were just the instances I happened upon right now.)

Guise, we need to get this whole licensing situation cleared up and begin taking intellectual property rights a little more seriously. Keep in mind that if violating material is found in the game, it affects not just this project, but everyone who distributes it too (Ubuntu, Debian, SourceForge, ModDB etc.) Ultimately, some of those distributors may simply choose to drop the package for good. My suggestion is to do the following for the time being: Every time anyone wants to add something (i.e. commit it to SVN), they need to be able to stand to account as to the origins of every piece of the addition (textures, sounds, meshes, texts, code etc.) If the addition includes any material that they didn't author themselves, they need to assert it in this thread along with complete author and license information. Only then do we have a fighting chance of sorting out whether everything can be legally distributed. If anyone repeatedly fails to declare their use of other's works, they need to be "reprimanded" or ultimately have any commit rights revoked (obviously this doesn't apply retroactively). IMO this is a stopgap measure. Before the final release, lawyers should be contacted and asked to help clear things up. I recommend the Software Freedom Law Center.

Latest SVN. I'll try re-downloading.

Blizzard's AI's are made from scratch like ours, they just have more development time than we do. If we were to somehow 'train' an AI to be as good as one of theirs, it would still be very inefficient and disk-space consuming.

If we had access to the Google server farm, maybe we would have enough disk space to do something like that

No human player has only a finite number of moves, so the file would need to be infinitely big. One could try doing some fancy machine learning, but I doubt it would work very well - there's just too many variables.