[Coldstuff] ColdHell

[coldstuff@cold.org]

On Wed, 17 July 2002, "Frank Crowell" wrote

> 
> Is it possible to turn ColdHell into an OSI (Open Source), so that the
> license is clearer?  

> ColdHell is still the only publicly available database for Cold that has
> all the machinery for creating hack-n-slash muds. By that I mean, a person
> could be fighting mobs Diku or LP style this afternoon with very little
> modification.

I'm glad to hear it's looked at that way.  As far Open Source...  Sure, where
do I sign?  I'm not one for extra work, you know... :)

> For a while both Inindo and I ran a ColdHell version and in fact hooked our
> muds together so I could run around between the servers.

I could talk about this all day.  I'm sure Bruce could, too...  Talk to me
before trying this kind of entanglement on a serious MUD... Another reason I
never really pushed to have this seriously public...

> Going back to OSI-- doesn't matter if the license is GPL, LGPL, Berkeley or
> some other of the many OSI-qualified licenses.

Does this mean I'd have to read and understand all of those licenses before
picking one?  Ohhh.. more work.

> Fact is that ColdHell works but most people don't even know it exists.  The
> Pueblo stuff is also interesting, but unfortunately unless the Open Source
> version of Pueblo comes out someday, then some other thing will have to
> replace Pueblo.



> The other possibility is to create a branch -- let's call it ColdHell 2.
> The previous development team gives license to the new team to create a
> branch that is under OSI, to credit the original creator/creators, but to
> also allow Coldhell 2 to evolve in new directions.

I believe ColdHell is still running, in some form, and it IS Inindo's baby,
not mine.  Without Inindo, I could release the Cold Paradigm core instead (I
can't remember if combat is included or not).

I would like my name stuck somewhere visible ("Based on code originally
written by Michael Mudge"?), as well as Inindo and Psyclone -- other than
that, do with it what you wish.

Then of course, again, there's Epoch, which I feel much happier about; It's
more thorough, much faster and much less buggy... and very MUDdy.  Give me a
little time (a month?) and I'll have something for you to look at.  Again, I
am also looking for people (builders + programmers) to become involved
immediately.

On Wed, 17 July 2002, Bruce Mitchener wrote

> For whatever it is worth, Pueblo is open source but not being developed 
> much.  There're 2 projects that work on it .. one more active than the 
> other.  I also maintain a mirror of much of the old Chaco website.

> I think that one of the Pueblo dev efforts is not linked from there, so 
> I'll track it down and link it this evening.

The "other" one I think you're talking about is Pueblo/UE.  Easy to find with
a basic web search.  It seems to be a bit less vaporish, but I haven't seen
much besides bugfixes (which I greatly appreciate).

- Kipp