4 ms·
Go ahead and continue the negative talk about me in regards to licensing violation claims if you must. So be it. But as mentioned earlier, I posted this as to w
by zodttd 15y ago
Go ahead and continue the negative talk about me in regards to licensing violation claims if you must. So be it. But as mentioned earlier, I posted this as to why Google responded the way they did. And it had nothing to do with open source violations.
To respond to some posts here. I generally don't charge for emulators. An example of profit sharing for ones I do, gpSPhone is done with an arrangement between the original author and I. It is licensed accordingly.
Though not an excuse these apps are largely an overblown hobby for me. I've come to learn how seriously people take this licensing. I always tended to do a lot of incremental updates, sometimes multiple ones to multiple products a day. Source control was a mess up until recently. Like I said, this was hobby-grade.
For those talking about a quick buck. If you think I'm getting rich off these emulators, you're sorely mistaken. I can easily focus AppStore and do better.
Really all I wanted to do was take peoples requests for ports since the Tapwave Zodiac, GBA, and GP2X days, and give them something to play with.
I've heard enough bashing of my name over the past year, that I haven't touched much at all since then. There's a laundry list of updates I want to do, but there's so much involved now it's not worth the grief. I had way too many ports being worked on, and spread way too thin.
I'm sure someone else will come along, step up, and do a lot of great work for emulation and homebrew in general on mobile devices. Just remember they do this out of love, either for free or unsustainable pay, and deal with tons of support questions and requests daily. Don't burn them out on politics.
I will gladly respond to concerns, as I have before. Though none of this will be needed to be discussed soon enough.
- gcb 15y agoSo, which was the explicit reason to take it down? Understand it's not license violation, i actually read TFA :) I'm curious.
- valisystem 15y ago> Go ahead and continue the negative talk about me in regards to licensing violation claims if you must. If you want to gain credibility on this, I suggest you to do an extensive research from your past work, see what open source code you used, and explain for each case, with more or less verifiable material, what actions, mandatory or courteous, you have taken in order to respect software license and their author (code publication, credits, and so on).
- zodttd 15y agoThanks... This all comes down to freshening up my GitHub and removing a Cydia Store product. This will be done but I let this mob mentality continue for too long. I spread myself pretty thin. I can count 20+ projects depending how far into the couple years I go. I have well over 4GB of development files with the majority being source trees. Some of these will be fairly straight forward and not require much action at all. As Xuzz notes here, I have my projects source up on my GitHub, sometimes it just needs to be updated. Also sometimes it is updated, but just lands up needing some organizing to realize it (version number mismatches in code or instance). Most however will be difficult when it comes to who to credit. I found out this is taken close to the heart over the years. I upset someone I respect very much, Notaz, at one point for not giving credit where credit was due. I rectified this with psx4droid v3 which I used his source, maintained a COPYING and README, credited, and kept the source up to date on GitHub. The issue is many emulators have been rehashed and ported so many times. For instance psx4droid v3 is based on Notaz PCSX-ReARMed which is a port of PCSX-Reloaded which is based on PCSX at some point. Along the way it used a MAME author's source file for handling the GTE. The MAME author contacted me for credit on the next revision which has not happened yet, and we discussed the issue at hand was it being passed down so much. So sometimes the credit list is huge and mostly unknown, and sometimes licenses mismatch if you really look at the sources. A good example is SNES which has been rehashed and ported to death from snes9x (and as Xuzz pointed out, will fix) almost exclusively. The code usually becomes a huge mix in the end to the point it's a good luck situation to unravel it. So doing this is not impossible, I will have to find some balance to please as many as possible without going insane trying to figure the sort out. Most being freshening the source at GitHub and checking compliance there. In the end there will be those who will complain and smear regardless. For those in this mob, they would never be fans and/or customers in the first place, but they do affect the overall feel of a company. And that's what concerns me moving forward... I appreciate you being calm and courteous with your constructive criticism.