Libraries deadline - release by Feb 29

richard on 2008/02/10 00:49

If you have a library that you maintain and would like to use during the challenge you need to be thinking about releasing it!

You have until the 29th of February to get your library out the door (ooh, one extra day this year!)

(log in to comment)

Comments

RB[0] on 2008/02/10 03:39:

What?
Oh, ok. I thought we had until a month before the competition, instead of a month and a half :/
Oh well, I guess that should motivate me a bit ;)

richard on 2008/02/10 07:59:

Crap. I'm really tired today.

Post edited to reflect the correct date - the 29th.

RB[0] on 2008/02/10 14:27:

Oh, thank you :)
Not that I was really too upset ;) All I have to do should only take that long this time anyway ;)

eugman on 2008/02/12 12:35:

Hey, I have some code from refactoring my projects after pyweek. I'd like to reuse some of the nicer functions and classes. I have no problem posting the code but I know I'd never have time to shape it into some nice library.

Is that cool? I don't think it has any super features that'd give me an edge.

riq on 2008/02/12 17:52:

Hi Richard,
I'm coding a library for PyWeek.
Where shall I publish it ? In this forum ?
Thanks.

richard on 2008/02/13 00:04:

eugman: sounds like a good candidate for a set of tutorials perhaps? Doesn't need to be combined into a "library" as such. Just a page describing the code (or code fragment) and a link to the well-documented code.

riq: any public place will do as long as you make it available and promote it. Google has free project hosting that's trivial to set up.

Note also the requirement for documentation :)

eugman on 2008/02/14 20:45:

Richard: That sounds like a good idea. I imagine it wouldn't be too much trouble to write up a dissection and some heavy documentation. I doubt the code will be that great but I guess it doesn't really have to be.

Also, assuming I allow free use for anything pyweek related, do I have to release the code under any sort of license for more general use? I'd like to still have some control over it if possible.

richard on 2008/02/14 20:52:

I'm not sure I understand: you wish to open the source to just pyweek developers?

eugman on 2008/02/14 23:23:

Well I'm probably being silly but:

I was thinking of making it so anyone is welcome to take the code and use it but expect someone to ask for permission when using a big chunk larger than a snippet for some purpose. In fairness, for pyweek this permission would already be implicit.

richard on 2008/02/14 23:37:

That's some tricky (and pretty vague) licensing terms you've got there :)

RB[0] on 2008/02/15 03:14:

Ok, so, what you are saying is, as long as someone intends to use this in Pyweek it is fine, and will fit into whatever license they use for the rest of the game - just let people know they use it, right?

But, if you aren't using it for Pyweek they have to specifically get permission to use this?

What happens when someone outside of the competition sees this in someones game, and copies from there?

eugman on 2008/02/16 14:37:

Yeah, I'm either going to find a specific wording or just give up and throw everything under lgpl.

RB[0]: Well the idea is the material used would be subsumed into whatever license they are using so that a person finding the code would just treat it the same. It would only matter if they were getting it off my site where there would be a request for asking before using any large amount in a project.

riq on 2008/02/29 22:15:

Hi PyWeekers,

We've finished a game library for Pyweek #6.
It is an extension of Pyglet (1.0 or 1.1).
Features:
  • Main loop: Director, Scenes, Layers
  • OpenGL transitions between scenes (think of PowerPoint or KeyNotes transitions)
  • OpenGL effects in layers
  • Menus
  • Sprites with various actions

    • homepage: Cocos homepage
    Programming Guide: Programming Guide
    Sources:
    svn checkout http://los-cocos.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/ los-cocos-read-only

    Give it try!
    And send us some feedback :-)

    We've coded some tests that are in: los-cocos/test that tests all the functionality. Try them to see capabilities of this library!

    cheers!

    viblo on 2008/02/29 22:59:

    Some of you might remember pymunk, a 2d physics library I released for the last pyweek competition. A lot have happend, and pymunk now has a googlecode page here: pymunk googlecode. Go there to download the new release if you want to experience cool 2d physics in your game ;-)

    viblo on 2008/02/29 23:54:

    After having read my post again, I think I should clarify a bit (yes I know, there is a forced preview function, but...): pymunk is not a physics library on its own, but wrappes the very nice Chipmunk library.

    With the new version you will hopefully get a more pythonic feel than last pyweek when the wrapper was just a very thin mostly generated wrapper. You won't have to do explicit frees to free memory from shapes and bodies you use, callbacks get the actual shape object and not a copy, you don't need to use the ctypes generated functions and so on. However, you can still do the low level stuff if you want, if for example some function or property is missing or you want to do some complicated stuff.

    pymunk uses the latest released version of Chipmunk, 4.0.2. It can be downloaded here: Chipmunk homepage

    Martin on 2008/03/02 13:53:

    Richard: Can you confirm that Pyglet 1.1 is out of bounds?

    richard on 2008/03/02 20:47:

    @Martin: pyglet 1.1 is allowed

    Martin on 2008/03/02 23:01:

    So the deadlines only apply to other people then? ;-)

    richard on 2008/03/02 23:27:

    @Martin: I'm being lenient and allowing the use of this release because it's such a popular library and it's so well-documented. I believe that pyweek entrants will have a reasonable opportunity to use the library.

    You will find that I've previously allowed the use of releases of other libraries where the authors have shown me that they have taken steps to make it reasonable for others to use their library.

    I tend to leave such questions up to my judgment when library authors contact me. If a release is reasonable (ie. doesn't change the library in a way that confers too much benefit to the author or penalises users) then I'll generally allow it.