I made a Source port graph!

I was lazy and didn't read the entire discussion.
So, if it's a common misconception that Zdoom use Quake code, then what about the supposed Build code?

Quasar said:

However, ZDoom 1.18b's p_effect.c is nearly line-identical to Fusion's p_effect.c -- why did the Fusion author get permission to recast this code as GPL when I did not? :(

Fusion?

http://doomquarter.tripod.com/fusion.htm

Quasar said:
However, ZDoom 1.18b's p_effect.c is nearly line-identical to Fusion's p_effect.c -- why did the Fusion author get permission to recast this code as GPL when I did not? :(

Is there any concrete reason why the ZDoom coders said no to you? (If they did, explicitly.) Is that part of the code based on something non-free? Besides, the Odamex team got permission to relicense ZDoom v1.22 to the GPL once they removed any conflicting code, if I am not mistaken.

There is some Build code in there, though I'm not sure whether it's really used (or usable). (There's a half-functional polymost renderer that doesn't do texture mapping, and ZDoom is able to load a Build map but not to a point where you could play it.) I think nobody would notice if the Build code was removed.

Heya guys. This will probably turn out to be a noob question, as you people clearly know a lot more about this stuff than I do, but when I first got into editing, I used a couple of programs that I couldn't see on the chart anywhere. There was DEU, then later WinDEU and DEUtex. Was wondering why these weren't on the chart, or is the chart more about code derivation than the completed utilities themselves?

Kyka said:

Heya guys. This will probably turn out to be a noob question, as you people clearly know a lot more about this stuff than I do, but when I first got into editing, I used a couple of programs that I couldn't see on the chart anywhere. There was DEU, then later WinDEU and DEUtex. Was wondering why these weren't on the chart, or is the chart more about code derivation than the completed utilities themselves?

Those are level editors. Everything on the chart tracks modifications from the original Doom code and the paths they took to their respective source ports

<--facepalm.

Told you it was a noob question. I guess thats how we learn though eh...

*sigh

Nice work on the chart.

Thanks Ralphis for answering my silly question btw.

Gez said:

I think nobody would notice if the Build code was removed.

Then there would be no slopes!

Sorry for the bump, but I updated the graph!

You have the old PSP Doom in the graph, which is fine, but not the new Doom for PSP v1.4. It's not based on the old PSP Doom at all, but a completely new conversion based on the ADoomPPC (v1.7) code.

Chilly Willy said:

You have the old PSP Doom in the graph, which is fine, but not the new Doom for PSP v1.4. It's not based on the old PSP Doom at all, but a completely new conversion based on the ADoomPPC (v1.7) code.

That certainly explains why your "Doom for PSP" port is REALLY better than "PSP Doom" :D

"Doom for PSP wins",... "Fatality"...


Question :
What about "C2DOOM" (Nokia smarphones, Ngage) and "DSDOOM" (Nintendo DS one based on PRBOOM) ?
Didn't see them in the graph...

Are you looking at the most recent graph? C2Doom branches from SDLDoom (below and to the right of Boom v2.02) and DSDoom is bottom-centre branching from PrBoom v2.4.2

Apologies for C2DOOM, what about DSDOOM ?... ( Don't forget WIIDOOM too :D )

I posted this at http://www.reddit.com/goto?id=6y3wf, I hope that's OK.

Chilly Willy said:

You have the old PSP Doom in the graph, which is fine, but not the new Doom for PSP v1.4. It's not based on the old PSP Doom at all, but a completely new conversion based on the ADoomPPC (v1.7) code.

Still miss this great masterpiece of Chilly Willy "DOOM for PSP v1.4" under "ADOOMPPC" (third column from the right starting with "ADOOM").

I updated the chart (and hopefully I don't get banned for doing so).

Heh, what changed?

You could add that Boom was influenced a bit by the v1.9 sources, which the development team apparently had access to. Killough said so once on a webpage of his.

myk said:

Heh, what changed?

You could add that Boom was influenced a bit by the v1.9 sources, which the development team apparently had access to. Killough said so once on a webpage of his.

Added ADoomPPC, Chocolate Heretic and Chocolate Hexen; Updated some port's versioning information.

GhostlyDeath said:

Added ADoomPPC, Chocolate Heretic and Chocolate Hexen

Chocolate Heretic/Hexen are not separate ports derived from Chocolate Doom; the three are a single codebase. You would be better off representing it as eg.

(Chocolate Doom v1.1.1) -> (Chocolate Doom future release) <- (GPL Heretic/Hexen Sources)

Not to mention that the Doomsday lineage remains incorrect ;)

The HeXen, Heretic and Doom sources would each branch to JHeXen, JHeretic and JDoom respectively.

Each Jport would then have a single branch that leads into Doomsday 0.96>. I wouldn't worry about representing the plugins.

Doomsday 0.96> would then have a single branch leading to Doomsday 1.7.14.

Branching off of Doomsday 1.7.14 would be both Doomsday 1.9.0 and Boomsday.

The final version of Doom64TC was also built off Doomsday 1.7.14 IIRC and was technically its own port in that it wasn't a plugin to the Doomsday engine so maybe that could be added as a branch off 1.7.14 as well.

Then branching off Boomsday, would be Risen3D.

I updated the graph and added colors to indicate source code status to the best of my knowledge. I also updated some other

Two month bump but hopefully I am spared in the name of Doom History - maybe someone should sticky this maybe.

GhostlyDeath said:

I updated the chart (and hopefully I don't get banned for doing so).

Heh, nah that thumbnail's fine, normally we kill page-breakers but this is really quite useful and it's nice and helpful to have as a reference, so it's clear.

Why is Linux Doom 1.10 in red when it should be green?

It's bright red, not the slightly more orangish red of closed source ports.

Why the special color? Presumably because since nearly everything else derives from it, it would cause too much confusion if it had a standard color. look at the mess between RORDoom, JHeretic, Chocolate Doom and jDoom. Imagine if the lines were all black.

Likewise, Doom 1.2 to Final 1.9, Heretic, Hexen and Jaguar Doom have unique colors. Jaguar Doom's green is pretty close to the "open source" green (the latter is slightly more bluish).

To give something a bit more helpful, the source code for ScoreDoom is known to be available.

The code for ADoom and all derivatives from it are freely available. I noticed you have them as gray (unknown). Well, now you know. :)

The code for ADoom, VDoom, ADoomPPC, and VDoomPPC can be found on aminet. All four are Amiga ports of Linux Doom. Doom for the PSP, which is derived from ADoomPPC, has the source in the archive with the game itself, so every copy of it has the source.

The arrow from QuakeWorld to VaVoom is a bit too long, and the arrows in this area are a bit messy.

I noticed that although some console ports are on the list, the Xbox port isn't to be found. It's fairly obvious that the Xbox 1 ports of Doom I/II are based on Linux Doom 1.10 (all the bugs from it being there), although I haven't played the Xbox 360 version to tell whether it's based on the first Xbox port or not.

"Doom It Yourself"

• originally based off linuxdoom1.10, but incorporated enough of Boom to play its maps as of version 4
• optimised for RISC OS but portable enough to compile+run on *nix (but PrBoom was better)
• source is available from the same page, although you have to hunt for the link a little.
• cringe-inducingly bad pun for a name :)

I bought the Xbox 360 version, and it is definitely based on the first Xbox port (they credit Vicarious, who ported it to Xbox 1 originally, while Nerve Software is the actual developer of the Xbox 360 version; it's got many of the problems in the Xbox 1 ports fixed, it pretty much feels like Chocolate Doom on a console), which in turn is based on the Linux Doom 1.10 sources.

Chart Updated