A question for the Rhisis team

[ClownOfValetine]

the last few weeks ive been scrolling through RZ and Rhisis's forums and ive noticed somthing... well more like didnt notice somthing

I noticed the forums for rhisis had gone Silent and no one was asking questions about it

I was just wondering whats going on
______________________________________________________________________________________
if anyone wanted to know why im asking

my server decided to try working with OSA due to the inactivity (funny considering DeathTrigger is suppose to be developeing it himself and he is merely starting C#) I prefer to work in C++ instead of C#...

 

[HolySinX]

the last few weeks ive been scrolling through RZ and Rhisis's forums and ive noticed somthing... well more like didnt notice somthing

I noticed the forums for rhisis had gone Silent and no one was asking questions about it

I was just wondering whats going on
______________________________________________________________________________________
if anyone wanted to know why im asking

my server decided to try working with OSA due to the inactivity (funny considering DeathTrigger is suppose to be developeing it himself and he is merely starting C#) I prefer to work in C++ instead of C#...

I think that's cause Rhisis is closed-source now.

 

[ClownOfValetine]

will they still be releaseing the source when done?

 

[GlaphanKing]

They do realize they have to release the source when its completed, right? Unless they want to break the OSI rules. They can leave it closed source for now, but it must be released because it started in open source.

Its also nice they don't mention this to anyone seeing as how a lot of people are relying on the server.

 

[Blackbox]

Its also nice they don't mention this to anyone seeing as how a lot of people are relying on the server.

Yeah, there was no word of it till I the other day when they first said it in their release thread of why it was so inactive...

 

[BBim]

They do realize they have to release the source when its completed, right? Unless they want to break the OSI rules. They can leave it closed source for now, but it must be released because it started in open source.

Wrong because we are changing our base, not using kiki's one anymore, so we wont break open source rules.
The thing was that me and aki stopped to look into server stability and figured it would need a rewrite. We considered starting from scratch, using a base I had or rewriting kiki's base. After considering all possibilities we decided to use the base I have, but we were uncertanly on it successed or not, so we kept it as a secret until we see it was going good.
We might or might not release the source when its complete, me and aki will make that decision late and bring the new source to the same place as it was. If we want to release the source, we need to find who made the base or rewrite it.
Believe me, it will be much better this way, rewriting something makes you see the errors you did last time.
I already said this to adidishen but let me tell to everyone:
Any packet information or something like that that osA or vbFlyFF(or any other, if gk needs something too but his packets are different ) needs, you can ask us and we will give it, we just wont give the source.

 

[GlaphanKing]

No harm no foul. If you have a more stable system then by all means go for it. I don't believe in stifling creativity and new ideas.

I hope you can come up with a stable server. Perhaps once it comes to be we can exchange some ideas.

I only meant the OSI applied to Kiki's source. If its your own creation, obviously its a new ball game.

 

[BBim]

No harm no foul. If you have a more stable system then by all means go for it. I don't believe in stifling creativity and new ideas.

I hope you can come up with a stable server. Perhaps once it comes to be we can exchange some ideas.

I only meant the OSI applied to Kiki's source. If its your own creation, obviously its a new ball game.

I know, I think my post looked a little rude because I didnt break it up. I was to lazy to come back and take the other part about we not telling what was going on and also break after explainning that
Just the first line answered your post and the next 3 about not telling what was going on x)
The rest was just to complement and have everything explainned.

Sure we can exchange some ideas, like I stated the reason for closed source is not hide packet information and such ;]