4 ms·

The code is there, but not all of it, as I understood - except the "Proprietary GPU Renderer". And yes - "Ultralight is free for non-commercial use and free f

by viach 6y ago

The code is there, but not all of it, as I understood - except the "Proprietary GPU Renderer". And yes - "Ultralight is free for non-commercial use and free for commercial use by companies with less than $100K gross annual revenue"

saagarjha 6y ago
GitHub says the project is 100% CMake, and I didn’t see anything to make it ignore the large amount of C++ that I would expect to underlie this project. Do you know where I could find the parts you’re talking about? Edit: I found it, it’s in another repository at https://github.com/ultralight-ux/WebCore https://github.com/ultralight-ux/WebCore.
- austincheney 6y ago
  You didn't look very hard. The commit message on the cMake.txt says: > Pruned repo history to get rid of 200MB of stale binaries. Repo has now been restructured to pull binaries in from S3 buckets during CMake build.
  - saagarjha 6y ago
    Those would be binaries, which I am not interested in. However, I did find the source I was looking for.
monadic2 6y ago
> GPU Renderer That seems rather important.
Rochus 6y ago
Not all code is there. The website https://ultralig.ht/ https://ultralig.ht/ says "No source code for proprietary modules" for the free version. If you want to use the technology in your free application then you tnerefore have to depend on a proprietary closed-source library. And as it seems only to save a bit of RAM. Better use Qt.
- genocidicbunny 6y ago
  To be fair, Ultralight supports the console platforms, which it cannot do with open source code (not allowed by the developer agreements.) As such, it would already have to have a way to deal with non-public binaries or sources in the tree. In addition, a GPU renderer that plays nice as an embedded library, and is performant and can properly render html is not a small feat of engineering. I cannot entirely blame the author(s) for keeping that part proprietary. I just question the wisdom of it in the face of free competition like WebKit, CEF, Sciter or Qt.
  - Rochus 6y ago
    > Ultralight supports the console platforms I don't understand that. The readme says "Ultralight is a lightweight, cross-platform, HTML rendering engine for desktop apps and games." How does this fit with your argument? > which it cannot do with open source code (not allowed by the developer agreements.) Why not?
    - genocidicbunny 6y ago
      Consoles, as in PS4, XB1, soon PS5..etc. Elsewhere in the thread the author said that some of these are already supported, and others are coming soon. Access to the SDKs for those, which you would need to run something like UL, is governed by contracts that you as a developer sign with the platform owner -- Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo, etc. These agreements very rarely (read: never) allow publishing of the SDK sources in any fashion. Even simply exposing code that calls into SDK functions would be in violation. You don't get access to the SDK unless you sign the contract, and if you sign the contract and breach it, they have legal cause against you. Usually if you want to use third-rdparty software for these closed platforms, the third-party and you must both have developer agreements with the platform owner. This of course excludes software that you as a developer ported to the platform on your own.
      - Rochus 6y ago
        Ok, I see, you're talking about home video game consoles, not command-line interfaces. I'm not home console developer (nor user); one reason is that it ties one too closely to the proprietary technology of individual manufacturers. But I see your point. Your arguments do not contradict my statements. I only stated that not all source code are available in the free version and therefore it is not an open source product.

by viach 6y ago

saagarjha 6y ago

GitHub says the project is 100% CMake, and I didn’t see anything to make it ignore the large amount of C++ that I would expect to underlie this project. Do you know where I could find the parts you’re talking about? Edit: I found it, it’s in another repository at https://github.com/ultralight-ux/WebCore https://github.com/ultralight-ux/WebCore.

austincheney 6y ago
You didn't look very hard. The commit message on the cMake.txt says: > Pruned repo history to get rid of 200MB of stale binaries. Repo has now been restructured to pull binaries in from S3 buckets during CMake build.
- saagarjha 6y ago
  Those would be binaries, which I am not interested in. However, I did find the source I was looking for.

monadic2 6y ago

> GPU Renderer That seems rather important.

Rochus 6y ago

Not all code is there. The website https://ultralig.ht/ https://ultralig.ht/ says "No source code for proprietary modules" for the free version. If you want to use the technology in your free application then you tnerefore have to depend on a proprietary closed-source library. And as it seems only to save a bit of RAM. Better use Qt.

genocidicbunny 6y ago
To be fair, Ultralight supports the console platforms, which it cannot do with open source code (not allowed by the developer agreements.) As such, it would already have to have a way to deal with non-public binaries or sources in the tree. In addition, a GPU renderer that plays nice as an embedded library, and is performant and can properly render html is not a small feat of engineering. I cannot entirely blame the author(s) for keeping that part proprietary. I just question the wisdom of it in the face of free competition like WebKit, CEF, Sciter or Qt.
- Rochus 6y ago
  > Ultralight supports the console platforms I don't understand that. The readme says "Ultralight is a lightweight, cross-platform, HTML rendering engine for desktop apps and games." How does this fit with your argument? > which it cannot do with open source code (not allowed by the developer agreements.) Why not?
  - genocidicbunny 6y ago
    Consoles, as in PS4, XB1, soon PS5..etc. Elsewhere in the thread the author said that some of these are already supported, and others are coming soon. Access to the SDKs for those, which you would need to run something like UL, is governed by contracts that you as a developer sign with the platform owner -- Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo, etc. These agreements very rarely (read: never) allow publishing of the SDK sources in any fashion. Even simply exposing code that calls into SDK functions would be in violation. You don't get access to the SDK unless you sign the contract, and if you sign the contract and breach it, they have legal cause against you. Usually if you want to use third-rdparty software for these closed platforms, the third-party and you must both have developer agreements with the platform owner. This of course excludes software that you as a developer ported to the platform on your own.
    - Rochus 6y ago
      Ok, I see, you're talking about home video game consoles, not command-line interfaces. I'm not home console developer (nor user); one reason is that it ties one too closely to the proprietary technology of individual manufacturers. But I see your point. Your arguments do not contradict my statements. I only stated that not all source code are available in the free version and therefore it is not an open source product.