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

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

On 1/21/07, Rainer Muetze <rai...@we...> wrote:
>
>  >Here's the options that are acceptable to me:
> >
> >
> >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.
> >
> >
> IDEA: We need some time to load the game. We can show the picture with the
> disclaimer and a process-bar.
> So nobody will be nerved, the user knows, for what he is waiting and has
> time to read it.
> Sounds perfect to me. I would use the AboutDialog with a little change, so
> it can be displayed from the helpMenu and from the startProcess.
> Have now expirience with processbars, but that would be intresting.
> If you agree check the patch in without the Options-Changes.
>



This idea sounds good.




>>
> >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.
> >
> Thats a point. We trust them anyway, because we give them the sources if
> they want them.
> I will read the open licence and maybe there is allready the protection
> for what I'm looking for.
> IDEA: If we put the disclaimer into the licence-file it will be much more
> protected as with my conclusion.
> Is this a way we can go?
>


Yes, including the disclaimer into the readme is good.



>>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.
> >
> The need to hold on also. But keep it if you think you have too.
>
>
> >Perhaps you should consult with a lawyer about this issue.
> I would have done it, if it would not be so expensive. (This is an
> international lawyer problem)
> At least we are on thin ice anyway and there will be no last word on that,
> until it is fight out.
>
> >
> >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.
> >
> You have your example projects and I have mine. Are yours popular?
> Nevermind, If you like my two IDEAs, I will send you a new patch tomorrow.
> (not with the progressbar, but without the internation double text and
> without the userConfirmation)
>


The two projects I'm thinking of are:

Colossus:   http://colossus.sf.net
JavaBBowl:  http://home.austin.rr.com/javabbowl/

JavaBBowl is used heavily by http://fumbbl.com/ .