Mumble on DS?

  • Pilot_51

    I have a Nintendo DS with homebrew hardware (R4 and 1GB microSD) and would like to see Mumble ported to it.
    The DS homebrew community relies heavily on source code to port software, as does most. I thought that since voice chat is at such high demand in DS homebrew, and since TeamSpeak and Ventrilo would never release their source code to make porting them possible, it would be a great opportunity to not only port Mumble, but to promote it in the process. I have no doubt that with sites with such a strong following as covering nearly every homebrew release, that a DS port would bring in hundreds of new users.

    Anyway, here's the port idea thread I posted on DCEmu:

    If necessary, I would be interested in supporting donations to get slicer the hardware to develop for DS, although I would rather someone else take the reigns so slicer can continue focusing on PC development.

    • Drew Patridge
      Drew Patridge

      correction to your post over there, the project isn't GPL, but revised BSD.

      GPL is open source that requires derivatives to be open source, BSD lacks that requirement.

      • Pilot_51

        So why do the project details on SF say "GNU General Public License (GPL)" for the license? That's what I used to determine what the license was.
        There was a bit of an issue with one of the DS homebrew projects under GPL being modified and sold as closed source, and the original developer realized he didn't really like the GPL requirements because he could only take legal action if the person who modified it didn't release the source. The situation started a couple months ago and that person refused to release source but didn't want to break any laws (although he came close when he started advertising it and if it wasn't for the major backlash from the homebrew community he probably wouldn't have taken notice), and he offered the developer somewhere around $500 for the code (which was obviously denied) so last I heard he was considering going out of business before it really even started.
        If the developer ha BSD as I understand it, the he would've really been discouraged from continuing his work since people could easily take his code and sell it as their own. Since that sounds so incredibly unrealistic for open source licensing, I'm probably quite wrong. All I found on Wikipedia about BSD that could be useful is the advertising clause, but that doesn't seem like much to me and most revised BSD licenses are leaving that behind. I don't know much about licensing so I could just be talking nonsense.

        I'll correct the post.

        • Mumble uses BSD revised precisely so people can take the code and make a commercial product out of it. The current mumble team does the coding on our free time, which is steadily decreasing lately.

          My main goal with Mumble is better voicechat for gaming. I don't really care if it's open source :) I would love it if Vent and TS copied my audio and network code into their products or if Google picked it up into Google GameTalk or something equally silly.

          So, if someone wants to make a new voip product, there's nothing stopping them from using Mumble as a base. This ensures that, unless the programmers are less-than-brilliant, the "new product" will be equal or better to Mumble. For end users this is a good thing.

          PS: The license says GPL, because doesn't differentiate between BSD (original) and BSD (revised) and only BSD (revised) is compatible with Qt's licensing. Also, the binaries we ship are GPL, as they include GPL-licensed Qt code. So the code is BSD licensed only if you download the source, and unless you have a commercial Qt license, the compiled binary is GPL.

          • Pilot_51

            I like that attitude, it's one thing that reminds me why I like Mumble so much more than TS. The TS devs are scared silly to release information about TS3 features because they don't want anyone else (specifically Ventrilo) stealing ideas before TS3 releases.

            Make a competitive product (check) and put customers before money or your worry of competition (check) and you'll be well on your way to having the most popular product of its kind (I can't wait to check this).

            • There's a major difference though. I have a reasonably well paid dayjob as a researcher (, so it doesn't hurt me personally if my "sales" go down. If Mumble was my means of putting food on the table, I would probably be just as protective as commercial vendors are today.
              TS3 and Vent are commercial products and without commercial sales their development will stop. There is too little competition in this field already, so I'd hate to see any of them go.

              Incidentally, the non-commercial aspect of Mumble does allow me to do one thing commercial vendors can't: I can say "No, that's wrong" when a user requests a new feature. While "sales" (download counts) are important for my ego, they are not essential for the program's survival. In other words, I can keep the integrity of my "artistic vision" ;)

    • Malkavian

      Well there is a problem... Vent or TS or... can make a commercial closed source version and make it only for Windows. This version can get popularity and could fuck GNU/Linux users. A open source version will always let somebody make a version for other systems. I would prefer GPL and not BSD licencing, because I'd like to talk from GNU/Linux. Now I have to use my laptop just for ventrilo if I want to talk with some friends that play Wow and/or Lineage. Wine, or a PC emulator didn't give me a good result.

      • I'm big on freedom. If a commercial vendor creates a closed source commercial derivate of Mumble, that is their choice, and I wish them to have the freedom to do so.