Re: [Rails-devel] Patch for Disclaimer, UserConfirmation and new Main-Class

[brett l. <wak...@gm...>]

On 1/21/07, Rainer Muetze <rai...@we...> wrote:
>
>  Hi,
>
> >I like the About dialog. However, I don't think the checkbox in
> >Options is necessary. It's a bit heavy-handed, especially when the
> >user has to check the box every time they play.
> >
> I do not think so. Take a 1/2 Second to confirm that I own the boardgame
> is nothink agains the playtime (4-6 hours).
> Maybe I'm paranoid. But I wan't just as much protection agains lowyers as
> possible.
> Friends have experients with them and I would like to avoid such trouble.
>


Here's the options that are acceptable to me:

1. We can have a disclaimer that pops up the first time the application is
run, that users must click through. However, If we require user acceptance,
then it's only acceptable to show this _once_ and not every time the
application is run. So, we'd need to write some parameter to a file that can
be checked for to suppress the disclaimer after the first run.

2. We can have the disclaimer in the AboutDialog, which is easily available
from all windows. It should show the game version and the disclaimer.

3. We can display the disclaimer text in a field in the Options dialog, so
long as we aren't requiring any additional actions to be taken by the user.
Use of our game is implicit acceptance.

4. We can display a startup dialog for a few seconds that includes a logo
image and the disclaimer text. Again, no user interaction is necessary, just
display the dialog for 5 seconds, and then close it and go into the game.


I will not force users to jump through a series of hoops every time they
want to play a boardgame.


>We should leave the disclaimer in the AboutDialog, and just remove
> >the checkbox in Options. In Options we can add a button to view the
> >AboutDialog. I think that's sufficient. That way the disclaimer is
> >still available on game start-up, but it doesn't block people from
> >playing.
> >
> Avaible is not enougth. We have to make sure, that the have at least to
> look at it.
> We can show the AboutDialog at every startup for a view seconds or after
> creating a new game.
> But both means more disadvantage for playstart then this checkbox.
> I don'nt know how many times I have to check a box for agreement yet, but
> it havend nervered me.
>


I don't agree.  We don't need to force the user into seeing it. We simply
need to make it available so it _can_ be seen.

Lawyers care if we make the effort at all. As long as we ship the disclaimer
in the readme and have it available in the application, we've made a good
effort to inform our users of the status of our application.


>I don't think it's necessary to hard-code the disclaimer text. It's
> >inconsistent with our localization efforts. It's also inconsistent
> >with the philosophy behind choosing an open source license. Having a
> >single copy of the disclaimer in the LocalisedText.properties file
> >is good enough.
> >
> OK, I have not read the hole open source licence yet,
> but properties are there to change it. We do not know, if there
> translation will be correct.
> I show only the english version, if the user choose english, and BOTH, if
> he choose an other language.
> At this way, the user can write a translation for him, but he has to
> change the code, if he want to change the meening.
>


It sounds like you're over-thinking the issue. This added complexity is
unnecessary.

If someone is going to localise my project, I need to trust them to do a
good job. Doing these sorts of second-guessing tactics is not a good way of
showing that trust.


>I know you want to get rid of GameTest. We'll do it very soon, but we
> >should do it after we refactor the package hierarchy. For now, we
> >should reorganize our existing files into a hierarchy that uses the
> >rails.foo.bar model and perhaps cleans up a few current
> >organizational issues. Then, we can move main() into a better
> >location.
> >
> I do not understand for what you are waiting, GameTest is complete
> implemented in RailsSwing,
> but If you want to to thinks twice from now on, don'nt remove it.
> You do not need another patch do do this change.
>


I'm waiting because this is just an aesthetics change. GameTest may be ugly,
but it works.

The need to change it is really very low.



>For now, I would like to see a scaled-down patch that is just adding
> >the AboutDialog and the disclaimer.
> >
> >Then, we can come back and find a good way to start adding some more
> >consistent conventions and relocate some of these other files.
> >
> As I said at my first email to you, protection agains lowyers is a very
> import think for me.
> You will not get another patch, as long as we don'nt get a agreement about
> how far we go with it.
> The implementaion of my patch is what I think we have to do at leased. I
> have show you some alternatives in this mail,
> but for my thoughts, they are much more annoing then this implementation.
>


Perhaps you should consult with a lawyer about this issue.

I am very comfortable with our efforts. I know of at least two other
projects that clone board games that have been around far longer than ours.
Both of them do not hinder the user's experience just to cover their own
asses.



---Brett.