LibGDX & RoboVM

Anything libgdx related goes here!

Re: LibGDX & RoboVM

Postby mzechner » Fri Oct 23, 2015 5:02 am

Auri wrote:But at the end of the day we have to think long and hard if the current situation is really feasible for us.


Exactly. We need to establish the long-term sustainability of both libGDX and RoboVM.

The market RoboVM is in is very volatile. As such, the acquisition by Xamarin puts RoboVM in a much better place concerning it's longevity. It also grants us more resources to make RoboVM better at a much faster pace than we could do if we are on our own. I would not have taken part in the acquisition if i didn't believe it is a net benefit for both RoboVM and libGDX.

Which leads me to the libGDX side of things. If i was a user of libGDX or PlayN, or if i was not working on RoboVM, the changes on RoboVM's side would also scare the bejebus out of me. Close sourcing and pricing changes gravely impact the trust the community build up over the past year and a half. However, if RoboVM wanted to screw over the libGDX community, it would have done so while making all this changes now. RoboVM could have simply removed any and all free access to RoboVM. But this is not what happened.

What happened is that RoboVM carved out a special license program for the libGDX and PlayN community. With this scheme, RoboVM must balance it's own interests (IP protection) and the goodwill and trust of the libGDX and PlayN community (adding new features for free, e.g. debugger). I think what RoboVM came up with is a good compromise for both parties, which increases sustainability for both libGDX and RoboVM (excuse the business bs bingo, but i can't express it any better).

So, the last question is "What happens in a year from now?". Sure, RoboVM could pull the plug. But that's no different to any project pulling the plug, e.g. the libGDX core contribs stopping working on libGDX, Unity killing their free offer because their market dominance allows them to, etc. So, in lieu of this, we need to ask ourselves why RoboVM would stop providing free licenses to libGDX folks down the road. If RoboVM did this, no self-respecting libGDX user would all of a sudden say " Golly, i'd better buy a license now!". Instead a huge backlash would happen, and people would simply boycott RoboVM, taking their anger to the web, hurting RoboVM's bottom line. It would simply not be a winning move in any kind of sense.

As for forking and OSS. We all know countless OSS projects that died because nobody could pick them up, either because of disinterest or because it was way to complex. RoboVM's core falls into the second category. I will not encourage or discourage forking of RoboVM, that's up for you guys to decide. But i will say that letting RoboVM do their best to make the tech more awesome and having us focus on libGDX while getting the RoboVM work for free without sources is probably a pretty good bet for everyone involved. You definitely don't want to rebuild my debugger :)
mzechner
Site Admin
 
Posts: 4879
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2010 3:50 pm

Re: LibGDX & RoboVM

Postby mzechner » Fri Oct 23, 2015 5:03 am

jimjamjahaa wrote:I've done the required steps and acquired a license. But i don't have a mac to use it with yet.

Will my license be made in to a "full" license anyway?

If not, is there anything i can do that doesn't involve buying a mac right now (that's a big investment considering i'm waaaaaay away from having an actual commercially viable game that would justify me buying a mac).


Your license will already work and will be upgraded to indie in the next 30 days. I'm afraid you'll need a Mac to develop for iOS, blame Apple. You can also check out other responses on this issue in this thread.
mzechner
Site Admin
 
Posts: 4879
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2010 3:50 pm

Re: LibGDX & RoboVM

Postby jimjamjahaa » Fri Oct 23, 2015 10:23 am

mzechner wrote:Your license will already work and will be upgraded to indie in the next 30 days.


Marvellous! Thanks!
jimjamjahaa
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2014 5:58 pm

Re: LibGDX & RoboVM

Postby Magnesus » Fri Oct 23, 2015 11:46 am

RoboVM Solo/Indie license lists "Eclipse Integration" as missing - does that mean the Eclipse plugin won't work anymore? :shock: Or is it only for integration for debugging or something?
Magnesus
 
Posts: 1706
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:50 pm

Re: LibGDX & RoboVM

Postby gnosis » Fri Oct 23, 2015 2:11 pm

Ok, for starters I made the choice for Libgdx because Xamarin was not free or open source years ago.

The realization that I ended up in exaclty the same place after being betrayed, and being treated like the "product" is tragic to say the least. You have undone my choice. If I were to trust you after what you've done I would be a complete fool & idiot, cause it's obvious that you're trying to profit from the comunity, perhaps not from the current veterans, but certainly after the "cool down" timer for this switch & rage has expired.

I never implied that you couldn't sell buisness-plans for consulting/support on RoboVM source code, but ending up with license keys and gradle activation for basic usage?!?!?

Sure, I applied for a licence through the google form, but I make my future plans expecting even more "Sorry, but from now on..." words from Xamarin in the near future. I still recall that I was trying to AVOID your new BOSS 2 years ago. It's not hard to see that they are trying to setup a monopoly for cross platform development for mobile.

I don't have the time to work on a fork of RoboVM, but without any fork, libgdx is not free and done for as far as IOS & cross-platform is concerned.

Being pre-emptive, I also require the LibGDX project owners to make a clear statement on this: Do they believe that they have a conflict of interest with RoboVM? Will they seek free alternatives to RoboVM? Will they take measures to prevent making code changes in LibGDX that favor Xamarin products? Otherwise we might even need a fork away from Xamarin-LibGDX in the near future. I've seen this happen before, too many times!

TL:DR Without an open source and free version you have no place in an open source comunity. Get off my Apache 2.0 Licensed Lawn!!
gnosis
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2014 4:48 pm

Re: LibGDX & RoboVM

Postby cuellarjmcg » Fri Oct 23, 2015 2:37 pm

Get off my Apache 2.0 Licensed Lawn!!


Well, to be fair, it was Mario who it started it all, so calling him the "reason" and thinking that he has "dark" intentations of this whole RoboVM fiasco, its going too far.

That's business for you. So yes, no hard feelings, nothing personal, is just freaking business. Is because of Mario that at least we have a "free" license, and its because of Mario that we still have a great framework, open sourced, cross-platform, where iOS is just one of the many platforms it supports.

With a caveat now? Of course, and the price is so freaking high for an indie developer (like me). But what can you do? Will you go to RoboVM office, searching for Mario to revert things back? You will have to convince a lot more people.
Our games and website: https://www.unlimitedggames.com/.
cuellarjmcg
 
Posts: 398
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2012 8:57 pm

Re: LibGDX & RoboVM

Postby gnosis » Fri Oct 23, 2015 2:53 pm

cuellarjmcg wrote:
Get off my Apache 2.0 Licensed Lawn!!


Well, to be fair, it was Mario who it started it all, so calling him the "reason" and thinking that he has "dark" intentations of this whole RoboVM fiasco, its going too far.

That's business for you. So yes, no hard feelings, nothing personal, is just freaking business. Is because of Mario that at least we have a "free" license, and its because of Mario that we still have a great framework, open sourced, cross-platform, where iOS is just one of the many platforms it supports.

With a caveat now? Of course, and the price is so freaking high for an indie developer (like me). But what can you do? Will you go to RoboVM office, searching for Mario to revert things back? You will have to convince a lot more people.


Apache 2.0 Licensed Lawn thought says it all: Hence the reason of me being so critical. IF it was closed source from the start, good! Kudos to him! But once people start making contributions, report bugs etc, guess what!!! its not Mario's work anymore! Will you see him making payments of RoboVM royalties to contributors? Hell no!

Say, I'm only here cause I saw that the RoboVM/Libgdx Combo was free and open source. I am no longer an adopter or evangelist for this because Xamarin happened.
gnosis
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2014 4:48 pm

Re: LibGDX & RoboVM

Postby Serapth » Fri Oct 23, 2015 3:17 pm

gnosis wrote:Apache 2.0 Licensed Lawn thought says it all: Hence the reason of me being so critical. IF it was closed source from the start, good! Kudos to him! But once people start making contributions, report bugs etc, guess what!!! its not Mario's work anymore! Will you see him making payments of RoboVM royalties to contributors? Hell no!



How the hell are you putting this on Mario?

First off, LibGDX is his baby and it's still open source.
YEARS ago, the decision was made to move to RoboVM.
MONTHS ago, Mario took a position at RoboVM. He's an employee.

Yes, RoboVM going closed source sucks. Yes, I am no fan of Xamarin and their insane pricing, but this entire thing has basically jack shit to do with Mario and isn't some kind of betrayal on his behalf. His employer was acquired ... do you think Mario as an employee had a whole lot to do with that?

Yes, it sucks, I get that. He has tried to negotiate a favourable outcome for the LibGDX community, what else do you expect him to do? Bascially if Mario wasn't involed with RoboVM the EXACT same thing could/would have happened, minus the license deal. Stop with the personal insults.

Now his employer, feel free to shit on them. Any time a project goes closed source it's bound to piss people off. Xamarin, hey... I was already on that hate train, so don't get me started. But ease off on the Mario bashing.
Serapth
 
Posts: 178
Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2013 8:05 pm

Re: LibGDX & RoboVM

Postby BurningHand » Fri Oct 23, 2015 3:52 pm

Pretty much what Serapth stated.
IRC: nexsoftware / mobidevelop; GitHub: MobiDevelop;
BurningHand
 
Posts: 2812
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 4:35 am

Re: LibGDX & RoboVM

Postby gnosis » Fri Oct 23, 2015 3:54 pm

Serapth wrote:
gnosis wrote:Apache 2.0 Licensed Lawn thought says it all: Hence the reason of me being so critical. IF it was closed source from the start, good! Kudos to him! But once people start making contributions, report bugs etc, guess what!!! its not Mario's work anymore! Will you see him making payments of RoboVM royalties to contributors? Hell no!



How the hell are you putting this on Mario?

First off, LibGDX is his baby and it's still open source.
YEARS ago, the decision was made to move to RoboVM.
MONTHS ago, Mario took a position at RoboVM. He's an employee.

Yes, RoboVM going closed source sucks. Yes, I am no fan of Xamarin and their insane pricing, but this entire thing has basically jack shit to do with Mario and isn't some kind of betrayal on his behalf. His employer was acquired ... do you think Mario as an employee had a whole lot to do with that?

Yes, it sucks, I get that. He has tried to negotiate a favourable outcome for the LibGDX community, what else do you expect him to do? Bascially if Mario wasn't involed with RoboVM the EXACT same thing could/would have happened, minus the license deal. Stop with the personal insults.

Now his employer, feel free to shit on them. Any time a project goes closed source it's bound to piss people off. Xamarin, hey... I was already on that hate train, so don't get me started. But ease off on the Mario bashing.


I accept and recognize his contributions under the open source license, after all, the apache licensed code is not his code, it's community code by the effect of the licence. Kudos for his initiative, and his work, but welcome to open source.

In retropsect this is a bait and switch scam, perhaps not by him directly, but he can't claim ignorance. The part where he appears generous as offering a deal with Xamarin to us over RoboVM is laughable at least and insulting.

If you had a coder in your company that would wish to lock your API to one commercial solution for something that was free in the past, you would be suspicious no? This is all happening in front of our eyes! And guess what, he works for that commercial solution!

I'm taking my losses and I'm moving on, but please don't pretend that Mario has the High Ethical Ground here, or that I owe him for libgdx, FFS...
gnosis
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2014 4:48 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Libgdx

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], MSN [Bot] and 1 guest