Technic Team releases Tekkit Lite
- Thread starter Gerhard
- Start date
-
The FTB Forum is now read-only, and is here as an archive. To participate in our community discussions, please join our Discord! https://ftb.team/discord
- Status
We have chosen not to use unofficial ports with dubious permissions in any FTB pack. I am sorry that respect for others work is an obscure principle in your life. While we do wish to make installing mods and modpacks easier for the end user this is not a democracy.The launcher team made it very easy for you to use the launcher to install any mod you want into the mod pack. However if we used some form of "voting" for mods to be included or for modpack format we would have way too many packs and mods in the launcher and on the servers where the data is stored.
I am delighted to see Technic is offering end users another option for modpacks. More options are always better for the end user. Technic will release modpacks different from ours under the principles and guidelines they use for assembling packs. We will release modpacks that abide by our principles and guidelines. In the end the end user gets more options.
As to any debate on whether a mod author has the right to request removal of his/her mod from a pack keep in mind forum rules state no name calling. Posts that break forum rules and do not add to the conversation will be deleted and the poster warned for rule violation.
I honestly don't see how choosing to include someone else's continuation of a project is disrespecting to the original designer.
In fact, instead of a petty argument, let's do some research here. Refer here. Notice the mention of the MMPL license. Let's take a look at that:
Am I not understanding this correctly?
I just don't see that as being doubtful. The license gives direct permission to modify and redistribute the source with no implications whatsoever. Krapht gives his 'permission' for this mod through his license. That's the whole reason for a software license, to give certain permissions and rights to users. I'm sure Krapht is a mature and dependable person and I'm sure he knows what he was doing when he cited this license. If we can trust he knows what he's doing, than we should be able to trust that his has given permission for this mod through his license. How can you have a "different" view? It's solid evidence that would hold up in court. You can't disrespect someone by doing something they explicitly gave permission to do!
* EDIT *
Since I cannot make another post response, I'll stick this here. This is the developer of the "unofficial" LP:
So, legally, there's nothing wrong with hosting this mod whatsoever. If you don't believe me, join #RS485 on EsperNet and ask him yourself. Promise the answer will be the same
You may view it your way. The launcher and mod pack teams see it differently. And this conversation is completly off topic. The topic of this thread is "Technic released a new pack" Let's stick to discussing that and not what people think should be changed or added to FTB.
Just a question about the "dubious permissions" part.
Krapht used the MMPL, which states explicitly the right to alter his code and to redistribute the altered code. You just also have to distribute the source code somehow, which the maintainer of that fork did (it is available on GitHub).
OK, I think I found your problem. Since the new version alters the original source code, instead of only deriving from its classes, it has also to be distributed under MMPL, but I can't see any information on which license it uses. If I understand the MMPL correctly, they now just need to state that they use the MMPL, and everything is fine.
Edit: During my writeup you posted the "back to topic now" post. Sorry for that
Edit2: According to Alias' citation of davboecki, everything is well. The only problem is now: We just have to take his word, that he didn't make that up (no offense meant).
Krapht used the MMPL, which states explicitly the right to alter his code and to redistribute the altered code. You just also have to distribute the source code somehow, which the maintainer of that fork did (it is available on GitHub).
OK, I think I found your problem. Since the new version alters the original source code, instead of only deriving from its classes, it has also to be distributed under MMPL, but I can't see any information on which license it uses. If I understand the MMPL correctly, they now just need to state that they use the MMPL, and everything is fine.
Edit: During my writeup you posted the "back to topic now" post. Sorry for that
Edit2: According to Alias' citation of davboecki, everything is well. The only problem is now: We just have to take his word, that he didn't make that up (no offense meant).
Acutally, I think the two posts that could be considered off-topic are in a way the heart of the topic. As you can see, FTB waits until it is absolutely mind-numbingly sure that all permissions are perfect. We don't know with LP, it could be something such as Krapht has said he's working on one and doesn't want the forked version to throw people off, who knows. The fact is, the pack team will not move forward with that, just because it can easily be misconstrued one way or the other.
On the other hand, the Tekkit/Technic team moves forward without making sure their ducks are in a row, incurring the post from CovertJaguar.
I think those together sum up the major difference. The Tekkit/Technic group is out to entertain their crowd. FTB appears to be out to give us dependable access to the mods when they are ready. While similar on the surface, you can quickly see the difference. Knee-jerk vs Planning. I know which one I'm sticking with long term.
Now, if only they had a hardcore adventure type with TFC and other such, then I'd never use another launcher.
On the other hand, the Tekkit/Technic team moves forward without making sure their ducks are in a row, incurring the post from CovertJaguar.
I think those together sum up the major difference. The Tekkit/Technic group is out to entertain their crowd. FTB appears to be out to give us dependable access to the mods when they are ready. While similar on the surface, you can quickly see the difference. Knee-jerk vs Planning. I know which one I'm sticking with long term.
Now, if only they had a hardcore adventure type with TFC and other such, then I'd never use another launcher.
In related news, the Technic released their new launcher alongside Tekkit Lite, featuring the saving grace of servers, custom modpacks. Seriously, its amazing, and modpacks have needed this for a long time. I hope Slowpoke and the rest of the FTB guys get theirs working as well soon.
Oh, I was reading the original message
Thanks.Interesting how RailCraft is now banned from the pack. Wonder if any other mod developers are going to go up in arms against them.
Oh, I was reading the original message
Interesting how RailCraft is now banned from the pack. Wonder if any other mod developers are going to go up in arms against them.
Strangely, I doubt it. Cheap Shot and Icewolf are pretty good about keeping that stuff running smoothly, looks like they just derped something up. It was something like "Tekkit Lite does not have the correct permissions, but the rest of the Technic mod packs do."
So, legally, there's nothing wrong with hosting this mod whatsoever. If you don't believe me, join #RS485 on EsperNet and ask him yourself. Promise the answer will be the same
Seems as though if this is true, FTB has full permissions to use the LP fork.
I'm asking in the LP forums (where the fork's author has been seen from time to time) so we can have a linkable response on a webpage to point to.
Tekkit Lite has permissions. What now? (Well except for Railcraft, but that's being removed in the next version.)
We're keeping this very civil please, don't fall for this bait. It's off topic and purposeless. Just ignore it and move on.
On the subject of these custom modpacks, they are really unbelievably cool. It makes things even easier to install now, and there is talk of even more cool new features coming.
Do you mean permissions to use that pack (the new, modified one) or the original permissions to modify LP into the new pack? Because the latter permissions are absolutely abundantly clear: Anybody has such permissions.
I won't be playing Tekkit Lite, simply because it is so similar to FTB there would be no point, but I believe that with RailCraft being sorted out, both Tekkit Lite and Voltz have full permissions, and I'm sure as the other packs get updated they will all have permissions too.
I don't have anything against Tekkit really, but boy there are sure a lot of D-bags posting in that thread.
- Status