Heretic and Hexen Sources Re-released Under the GPL

Too bad the ACC compiler wasn't included as well.

So this means that Odamex could get some of the missing ZDoom features it lost in order to be GPL, notably Heretic and Hexen support?


Also, I'm thinking: "Next step: Shadowcaster"...

Well done Quasar. I'd totally given up on this :) Thanks to Caryn 'Hellchick' Law for trying to get somewhere with this years ago, but big props to James for getting it done in the end!

Oh snap :O

Awesome news ;)

Tireless effort paid off! It's what I tell my students: Keep nagging and nagging and nagging and you'll eventually get what you want... from your parents.

The only thing I'm thinking is, what do I have to live for now...?

Great job!

Now those closed source ports with hexen code in them can open their source and say that the hexen parts are taken from the GPL version (and coded in in 1 day) instead of the old EULA version.

Not that I would forget the truth, but maybe they can fool a few :P

What ports are that?

Time to start a Free Data project(s)! I've been doing replacement stuff for Heretic the other day but they're guns :(

This is nice.
Thank you, Quasar, for having such a long breath!

Greetings
Funduke

Bah! I like Doom allot better!

Oh yes, I remember this mission. Good job to those involved, and thanks Raven Software for being awesome.

We're on the front page of reddit btw, right now.

Out of curiosity, has anyone digg'ed this yet?

This is great news :)

hardcore_gamer said:

Bah! I like Doom allot better!

Good thing Doom is already under the GPL then.

This is great news !!! ^__^

Cool

Awesome stuff, it'll be interesting to see how it effects the GPL port scene.

CodeImp said:

Now those closed source ports with hexen code in them can open their source and say that the hexen parts are taken from the GPL version (and coded in in 1 day) instead of the old EULA version.

Your assumption is faulty in that you assume that the authors of closed source ports actually have any desire in the first place to go GPL.

It will be interesting to see what happens to Skulltag when GZDoom finally goes GPL. Being based on an outdated of ZDoom never hurt ZDaemon's userbase, but it certainly didn't help it, and Skulltag's growth certainly outclasses ZDaemon's growth over the past year or so. All it would take is a new multiplayer source port based on later revisions of GZDoom (or even incorporating it into the port itself) and now the shoe is on the other foot.

What an awesome way to celebrate Doom's 15th. :)

This may sound funny, but the source could be used to have Chocolate-Doom be able to replicate the behavior of Doom 1.2

Wow some good news right there. Thanks to Raven and the people who communicated with them over the years. I honestly didn't think it was in the future for those games. A fun fact/mention in the Cacowards, I'd say.

AlexMax said:

It will be interesting to see what happens to Skulltag when GZDoom finally goes GPL.

Assuming it does. The sound code needs to be re-written before this can happen because fmod is not gpl compatible.

leileilol said:

This may sound funny, but the source could be used to have Chocolate-Doom be able to replicate the behavior of Doom 1.2

How so? Are one of those source releases (presumably Heretic) forked from Doom 1.2?

Yes. For 1.2 emulation you'd need at least Heretic's sight checking code if I am not mistaken.

Lets see some Hehacked!

JohnnyRancid said:

Lets see some Hehacked!

I don't think so.

AlexMax said:

It will be interesting to see what happens to Skulltag when GZDoom finally goes GPL.

Unless ZDoom follows it wouldn't amount to much. Of course they'd be cut off from any changes I'd make that don't go into ZDoom but that wouldn't be much.

All it would take is a new multiplayer source port based on later revisions of GZDoom (or even incorporating it into the port itself) and now the shoe is on the other foot.

Yes, such a development could definitely become a problem for them, especially if it would feature better netcode than Skulltag.

ok, this news makes me happy.

Enjay said:

How so? Are one of those source releases (presumably Heretic) forked from Doom 1.2?

Yes.

http://www.doomworld.com/10years/ports/oldtree.png

leileilol said:

Time to start a Free Data project(s)! I've been doing replacement stuff for Heretic the other day but they're guns :(

Bleh. What's so wrong with just buying the original games?

Edit: Since I pretty much know your response already, let's take a look at what Richard M. Stallman thinks about it:

From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: Views on changing software policies...
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 03:24:57 -0500

    I was wondering if you had specific thoughts about software that was once 
    non-free, but the company or developers have liberated it to be under a free 
    license (GNU, BSD, or whatever).  Do you feel as the companies or developers 
    have done a right thing by turning over?

Yes.  They formerly denied the user's freedom, which was unethical,
but they have changed to respecting the user's freedom, which is
ethical.

					      How do you feel if they continue to 
    develop/publish non-free programs, and only a specific set of software is 
    freed?

The free programs are ethical and the non-free ones are not.

    I'm thinking somewhat on the lines of liberated games.  Games like moria have 
    been entirely liberated; whereas others like Doom and Quake only have had 
    their engines freed, and their game data files remain nonfree (still make a 
    profit on the game data)... it seems that Doom and Quake might constitute as 
    only 'semi-free' as they still depend on non-free data (although projects 
    like FreeDoom (BSD-licensed) and OpenArena (GPL-licensed) exist to make free 
    game data, to allow an entirely free game to be distributed).

Game data is more like art than like software, so I don't think it has
to be free.  On the other hand, free game data is a good thing.

Free game data is good, but it's not necessary. Free Software is about protecting the user's rights on the *software* he uses, art is art; no one disagrees that free art is a good thing, but it's not a necessity.