I've been thinking the possibilities of how EOL development might continue in the future, regarding the client/server source code.
1) The sources (both client and server) won't be shared to anyone.
2) All the sources are shared to the public.
3) All the sources are shared only to certain people that are trusted and have at least some sort of coding skills.
4) The sources are shared only partially to the public.
5) The sources are shared only partially to certain people.
I'm sure there are other combinations too, but these are the most common. Now, for the pros and cons:
1)
Pros:
-Cheating is not easy.
-One person codes and therefore he has good knowledge about the sources, even if code wasn't commented.
Cons:
-Single point of failure. Development is completely up to mila's motivation and time.
-Cheating is not impossible nevertheless.
2)
Pros:
-Everyone is able to contribute - coding/refactoring/fixing bugs -> faster development.
Cons:
-Cheating may be easy.
-Synchronizing changes to the code might be difficult with many coders.
3)
Pros:
-More contributors, better motivation -> faster development.
Cons:
-Someone may leak the sources, either intentionally or unintentionally.
4)
Pros:
-Everyone is able to contribute - coding/refactoring/fixing bugs -> faster development.
-Cheating does not become any easier because the critical parts of the sources are not shared.
Cons:
-Not being able to see all sources may cause some problems.
-Synchronizing changes to the code might be difficult with many coders.
5)
Pros:
-More contributors, better motivation -> faster development.
Cons:
-Someone may leak the sources, either intentionally or unintentionally.
-Not being able to see all sources may cause some problems.
The leakage of sources is of course not a bad thing in itself, but because someone may start abusing them. I've been also thinking whether publishing sources necessarily implies easier cheating (in the main EOL server). Could there be a system where this were not true?
Ok, the only reason for this (that I can think of) is that sharing the sources would imply ez cheating. But as you said - the asm code is right there (for the client). If someone really wants to cheat, he will learn asm from tutorials all over the net and do it that way. What about the anticheat? Well, I cracked it, back in July. Yes, I admit it right now, because it doesn't really matter, except that I just wanted to point out that the sources being closed does not imply that it's impsy to cheat.milagros wrote:i won't give my c++ code to anyone and asm code is right there..
For options 3) and 5), it may be hard to determine whether someone is trusted or not. In this context, "trusted" means obviously someone who will neither leak the sources nor abuse them. To my experience, at least most of the Elma programmers seem to be trusted (mila, jon, Domovoy, me, ...). I mean, for example, they could use their skills for doing some evil patches/progs, but they don't.
I'm sure Max is not the only one who would like to contribute. At least jonharkulsykkel and me would surely be interested, although I haven't explicitly asked jon anything about this.[20:53:44] (Max) mila should open the server code.
[20:53:52] (Max) so I can make patches to fix this stuff.
I wanted to write this post because I think it's bad to have only one demotivated developer in EOL coding project, while there could be more. Mila's work is, of course, invaluable, but he has admitted he's no longer interested. Would it not be time for a change?
For the EOL website, jon (at least) has been added to the development team. That's a step forward, but I think we need a similar step for EOL, too.
Share your thoughts. Which of the five options would be the best, and why?