License questions

I have a question about the license... Well. I know how zlib license works. So this is most a question about SPARK developers feeling about source code direct integration.

For many reasons I have decided to include directly source code of spark in my engine. I have to edit a bit the code to better matching with existing libraries.

Is it fine to authors if to the copyright notice I'll append

Code:

Any further change to this file is copyright (Name - Year) see license.txt for details

my engine will be zlib licensed too.

Hi, as clearly stated by the license :

Code:

3. This notice may not be removed or altered from any source distribution.

However there s also :

Code:

2. Altered source versions must be plainly marked as such, and must not be misrepresented as being the original software.

So puting your small notice just below the license should be fine.

But can I ask you why do you want to integrate SPARK source directly to your code ? Are there some points that blocks you from the external lib directly ? I m interested because I designed it to be easily used in an already made engine.

Moreover, and especially if you use SPARK 2 which is not totally finished, it will be a lot harder to benefit from bug fix and new features if you modify the source.

Juff wrote:

Hi, as clearly stated by the license :

Code:

3. This notice may not be removed or altered from any source distribution.

However there s also :

Code:

2. Altered source versions must be plainly marked as such, and must not be misrepresented as being the original software.

So puting your small notice just below the license should be fine.

But can I ask you why do you want to integrate SPARK source directly to your code ? Are there some points that blocks you from the external lib directly ? I m interested because I designed it to be easily used in an already made engine.

Moreover, and especially if you use SPARK 2 which is not totally finished, it will be a lot harder to benefit from bug fix and new features if you modify the source.

Yeah I know how this kind of license works. Just wanted to listen if you liked direct integration rather than lib linking. If you don't like that I will don't do that. License is one things, but developers feelings are another thing too

Now I explain why. That's simple, I need to improve code re-using. Much classes are too much similiar between the engine and SPARK so I decided to use SPARK classes directly, wich I have profiled and are also a bit faster. I will replace all configuration stuff with my configuration stuff also, and there are few things that I don't like and I want to remove, I have also a custom memory pooling allocator wich reduces at minimum allocation time and I want to use it in spark also so that every class in the engine can use the same allocation strategy for consistency.. that's all. At this point adding files to the project would be better, while for updates I will use Tortoise to keep track of changed files and eventually patch integrated files. Writing my own renderer for spark will be the last step then. I really like spark, and its composition behaviour, most engines uses just only inheritance. Composition is better if used well according to me, and if you succed also at using templates in SPARK it will be even better.

Ok,

No there s no problem with it. If i didnt want direct integration of the source to be possible, I would have chosen a less permissive license . The thing I appreciate is credits being given when used, even if not mandatory, this allows people to hear from the lib.

Allowing custom allocation strategies in SPARK is something i d like to add in the future.

Regarding template integration, I m working on it for the renderering system but it is quite tricky and I dont have a lot of spare time. Anyway the design is already made, now i need to finish the implementation.