Official Tremulous Map Repository

[khalsa]

Under developer direction, DavidSev and Wireddd are working on an official map repository for Tremulous.

Unlike other repositories we are going to allow uploads. How this will work is that a mapper will upload their pk3 and some automated code on the website will check to make sure it meets certain criteria. Then the map will be put into a moderation queue and a moderator will have to look at it and approve it.

Additional things that the repository will have:

• stats collection: play count, downloads. a rating system
• user comments
• levelshots (the picture of the level that you see when loading the map)
• additional upload for map source zip file
• a short description of the map by the mapper

This is what the map validator currently checks/looks for:

• a levelshot
• a single .bsp
• no files that overwrite anything in any of the default maps or data/vms-1.1.0.pk3
• the bsp file must contain the proper entities for player spawns etc.
• no potentially dangerous files, ie no .exe etc
• no qvm/dll/so/dynlib
• a filename that conforms to the map-mapname-version.pk3 naming scheme
• a "message" entry in the world spawn (this is what Tremulous uses to get the full name in the loading screen)

Some other things that we would like feedback on:

• Should we allow maps with no lightmap (fullbright)?
• Should we standardize on a pk3 naming scheme for versions? map-mapname-1.pk3 map-mapname-2.pk3 or something?
• Is everyone OK with having to put a file named 'COPYRIGHT' in their pk3 so we know what the terms are?
• Is there anything else that you would like to see?

More details about the project can be found on the Repository Wiki Page^wiki
The code for this will be open source as well and can be found in the mercenariesguild git repository. It is licensed under AGPL. Bug reports, patches, and the repository are viewable at the MG Projects center.

If you are interested in helping with the development of this contact wireddd on irc or reply in this thread.

[your face]

So a lot like how tremcentral does it.

And copyright? Huhwut?

[wireddd]

So a lot like how tremcentral does it.

well the upload part anyway.

And copyright? Huhwut?

There really should be some copyright terms in the pk3. For example cc-by-sa or w/e.

[amz181]

Lightmap should be a compulsory thing. Maps without it look terrible. There should be atleast some sort of quality control.

And as for maps i'd like to see on the main page of the repositry, a New map, with thumbnail, a popular map with thumbnail.

And maybe a most discussed, with thumbnail.

[ShadowNinjaDudeMan]

Im with your_face on the "Huhwut"? front in regards to copyright. Unless by that you just mean a little note saying "pm me when you steal all thats not nailed down".

DEFINATELY

• A standardized naming system.
• Levelshots
• NO FULLBRIGHT MAPS, pleze?

Thanks
(great idea by the way)

[SlackerLinux]

if you can make sure all the maps uploaded has ALL of the textures in the pk3(minus ones that came with trem) one thing i hate is maps that are missing textures because the mapper decided to use a texture from another pk3 i haven't downloaded yet

also no crap maps like paint highrise mission 1 *cannon etc etc

[David]

Filtering on (non-technical) quality is a mine-field we don't want to get into.
Texture checking could be cool, although requires parsing of shaders and particle scripts and all that jazz.  But doable.

For copyright, I vote default to CC-BY-SA like 1.2 will be.
Whatever the copyright, we need to remember to make them agree a "I have permission to upload" thingy.

* David looks forwards to the DMCA complaints arriving :s

[Confess]

I've been wanting something similar for Tremcentral for a long part of time. Talk to me, I've got a proposition for you.

[ghostisback]

It looks great idea. IMHO must be a rule about map names.

Have Fun !!!

[N.U.K.E.]

That's a great idea!
Just what is fullbright, the effect with r_lightmap 1? In that case, I think we shouldn't because that's fugly.
Maybe a client built-in map downloading feature, so that you don't have to either go to a server to download it or start your browser again?

@David: non-technical quality won't be that much of an issue. If they're going to implement a rating system, then maps with only low ratings could be filtered.

[David]

fullbright is where there's isn't any lightmap for r_lightmaps to show.  Basically there are no lights to everything is fully lit.  Looks like shit, but IMO kinda pointless filtering for, as people can just add a single dud lightmap somewhere to get around the filtering.

[Bissig]

That's a great idea!
Just what is fullbright, the effect with r_lightmap 1? In that case, I think we shouldn't because that's fugly.
Maybe a client built-in map downloading feature, so that you don't have to either go to a server to download it or start your browser again?

@David: non-technical quality won't be that much of an issue. If they're going to implement a rating system, then maps with only low ratings could be filtered.

So, you are to lazy to start up a browser to download the map, but you also don't like downloading from the game server you are connected to?

[gareth]

excellent idea.

# Is everyone OK with having to put a file named 'COPYRIGHT' in their pk3 so we know what the terms are?

you probably cant expect people to do that. You could use some heuristics on included readmes (dont bother trying to enforce a standard here, either ) though, or just display them next to the download.

    * All maps should be named map-name-version.pk3
    * One mapper owns the namespace to their map, on a first-come-first-serve basis
    * Location names (1.2 HUD will be displaying these so might as well)
    * No pornography (good reason to have a human look at the map prior to including it)
    * No "Acid" maps (Insanely bright textures that have animmaps intended to cause seizures)
    * No Variable/Cvar changing? (Eg. cg_humanbuildpoints 999, g_gravity 0)

too strict for my liking.

[David]

Why?  Which bits?
If you don't like it now is the time to get it changed.

[Repatition]

    * All maps should be named map-name-version.pk3
    * One mapper owns the namespace to their map, on a first-come-first-serve basis
    * Location names (1.2 HUD will be displaying these so might as well)
    * No pornography (good reason to have a human look at the map prior to including it)
    * No "Acid" maps (Insanely bright textures that have animmaps intended to cause seizures)
    * No Variable/Cvar changing? (Eg. cg_humanbuildpoints 999, g_gravity 0)

too strict for my liking.
[/quote]

I agree with this all! but the * No Variable/Cvar changing? (Eg. cg_humanbuildpoints 999, g_gravity 0)
because thats the mappers decision! it could be in space or somthing?

[David]

That one has already been dropped, ATM the script just prints it out so it's easy for the human checker to see what's changed.
Now I've looked into it more, the list of cvars that maps can set is *extremely* limited, and all the controversial ones (bp) can be and routinely are overridden by mapconfigs, which makes them mostly useless, but also mostly harmless.

Nether the less, we still need to decide if a map setting bp to 100000 should get in, the servers that don't override it are the ones that want default BP.

[danmal]

For copyright, I vote default to CC-BY-SA like 1.2 will be.
Whatever the copyright, we need to remember to make them agree a "I have permission to upload" thingy.

I don't understand. Are you suggesting that all maps without a COPYRIGHT file will be listed as CC-BY-SA?

[David]

Yep.  Make them agree to it when they upload it, unless they specify something else.

[Bissig]

I strongly agree with streamlining map names.

Currently every mapper seems to have his own scheme:

mapname.pk3
mapname-1.1.0.pk3
mapname-alpha-1.1.0.pk3
mapname-1.1.0-alphav2.pk3
mapname_alpha5.pk3
map-mapname-1.1.0.pk3

Etc... It is a mess.

I would like something along the lines of:

map-mapname-alpha/beta/final(optional)-1.1.0.pk3

[Repatition]

That one has already been dropped, ATM the script just prints it out so it's easy for the human checker to see what's changed.
Now I've looked into it more, the list of cvars that maps can set is *extremely* limited, and all the controversial ones (bp) can be and routinely are overridden by mapconfigs, which makes them mostly useless, but also mostly harmless.

Nether the less, we still need to decide if a map setting bp to 100000 should get in, the servers that don't override it are the ones that want default BP.

make a limit of 250 max bps

[Colynn']

If the mapper doesn't respect the "standards" of a map (buildpoints, gravity, fullbright(?)...), I think you could add a text area where the mapper could explain his choice (like somewhere in this topic, "I put no gravity cuz its in the space"), and then the moderator will decide or not to let the map be in.

+1 for the standardised name.


(Sorry for approximative english. :/)

[gareth]

@David

 * All maps should be named map-name-version.pk3

People are unlikely to bother changing the names of their maps (even to get on your thing ). So this will stop some maps being listed.

  * One mapper owns the namespace to their map, on a first-come-first-serve basis

Its not clear what you mean by namespace or own here. But the way I interpreted is as suggesting that someone with "atcs" would be able to stop people uploading (posing as mapper for?) "atcs_zero" and "atcs_sex", which seems like a restriction on creativity.

   * Location names (1.2 HUD will be displaying these so might as well)

Again, people wont do this just for you, so this will cut out some maps.

  * No pornography (good reason to have a human look at the map prior to including it)
    * No "Acid" maps (Insanely bright textures that have animmaps intended to cause seizures)
    * No Variable/Cvar changing? (Eg. cg_humanbuildpoints 999, g_gravity 0)

these appear to be limiting creativity in order not to offend people. I guess thats your choice but it is not mine.

Making mappers upload their own maps (know about it, register, wait, etc, etc) is also going (IMO) to stop lots of good maps getting on your system.

[Asvarox]

Well mapper should want to have reliable no-dead-link hosting. And if it's going to be "official" well promoted repository, then someone would be stupid if he doesn't want to spend additional few minutes to help his hard work spread much faster.

As for standardizing: What I'd love to see is some kind of well promoted auto mappacker tool, that prepares your map's pk3 automatically after filling a form. This way it will be much easier and faster for maps, and it will keep pk3's naming/content standards quite well. Still I'd have to be well promoted.

[khalsa]

The intention in making this Official map repository is to be able to create and maintain some standards that mappers can optionally adhere to for Tremulous maps. The official download repo will be the default for servers in 1.2 (though they are more than welcome and able to change it) and will create a single place servers and players can use to discover new maps. This means that server owners can easily and readily add new maps to their servers, with reliable, future-proof http downloads.

The fact that this is official, rather than third-party will drive acceptance and usage, and allows us to place certain standards on what is accepted. This also means that mappers will have a much higher chance of seeing their maps played if theirs is in the Official repo. The fact that there is going to be commenting, rating, reviews, descriptions, and some standards is just bonus in my book.

This thread, and the wiki page^wiki exist so we can continue to get feedback from the community as to what they think is acceptable, and we appreciate any comments you may have. Please continue doing so up until, and beyond this project is launched.


Khalsa

[David]

People are unlikely to bother changing the names of their maps (even to get on your thing ). So this will stop some maps being listed.

They don't have to change the name of the map, just the pk3.  And it's simple requirements that most people will agree makes sense.

Its not clear what you mean by namespace or own here. But the way I interpreted is as suggesting that someone with "atcs" would be able to stop people uploading (posing as mapper for?) "atcs_zero" and "atcs_sex", which seems like a restriction on creativity.

Under the above mentioned naming scheme, it would be map-$name-$version.pk3.  So if I "own" atcs, then you can't release map-atcs-2.pk3, but you can make map-atcs_shitty_boxmap-1.pk3

Again, people wont do this just for you, so this will cut out some maps.

The locations will be on the hud in 1.2, so it's a lot more visible.  Although the lack of them probably shouldn't be a blocker. (esp for alpha's etc).

these appear to be limiting creativity in order not to offend people. I guess thats your choice but it is not mine.

Making mappers upload their own maps (know about it, register, wait, etc, etc) is also going (IMO) to stop lots of good maps getting on your system.

We don't want to host porn.  It'll make it hard to get mirrors, cause legal issues and generally isn't what we want to be doing.
"Acid maps" aren't something I've seen, but again with the don't want to host something that can cause harm.  (Same reason no .exe or .qvm in maps)
As mentioned above, the cvars being changed won't block anything, but the whole point is playable maps.  I guess most things will get through if they "work".

[Undeference]

Filtering on (non-technical) quality is a mine-field we don't want to get into.

Most nontechnical things (such as the definition of "playable") should be left up to server operators. I.e., accept based on technical criteria and ignore everything else. You could go with nontechnical criteria for official servers, when and if there is such a thing, but that is separate.

Potentially seizure-inducing maps fall under "nontechnical things" for a number of reasons, not the least of which being that untreated photosensitive epileptics probably should not be playing video games like Tremulous.

We don't want to host porn.  It'll make it hard to get mirrors, cause legal issues and generally isn't what we want to be doing.

Can you possibly ensure that everything is legal in every jurisdiction where the site is accessible? That applies to pornography ("I know it when I see it.") and intellectual property misuse and anything else that someone somewhere thought was a good idea to outlaw.

People are unlikely to bother changing the names of their maps (even to get on your thing ). So this will stop some maps being listed.

Assuming some form of consistent naming between maps from a single mapper, there are a tonne of programs for renaming them automatically, if mappers are too lazy to do it themselves. Perhaps the submission stuff could suggest a name itself.

[SeanHeron]

I'm no mapper, but I agree with David on almost all points - I'd see the point of having an official Repository in ensuring that maps downloaded are of certain quality, and not just a waste of a users time and bandwidth. All the rules I've seen proposed here reflect that - and that includes the "no-porn" and "no-acid". (I can hardly imagine a scenario when a map with either of these is of high quality; and regarding the restriction of "creativity" argument - please, noone is forcing you not to make maps like this, they're just not going to be on the official server)
.
And the argument that restrictive rules for uploading will reduce the number of maps uploaded - I would think this is only valid for low quality maps in any case. Someone who puts a lot of time and effort into making a decent map is not going to shirk from going the last yard to get it onto the official server, I don't think. Exceptions for "alpha" maps might make sense to me, though!
(And in that vein, I would support enforcing location names, as they are a potentially highly useful (even essential) tool to playing.

I also think making licence/copyright information compulsory makes sense.

[Confess]

So, correct me if im wrong, but are you suggesting that if a map where to have a default of bps that does not fit your criteria, you would not accept it?

If thats the case, I think that is severely the wrong way to go. Instead, you should allow the server owner to decide whether hes going to allow that map to be played on his server, not for you to decide. I believe that all maps should be on the main server. You are not uploading directly to the server, and it still requires the server owner to download the map in order for it to be played on his server. Therefore, your 'criteria' for whether a map should be allowed on a server should be one simple rule: Is it playable to any extent? If yes, upload. If it causes issues with a server/has viruses/etc - then no. This is what Tremcentral has run off of, and it has worked very well. We even have an option in which you can subscribe to recieve all of the maps uploaded directly to your server via FTP, and then you can block any maps you dont want. I can see moderating that portion, but moderating what can and cannot be uploaded? Thats just plain foolish and, I see it as in a way, socialistic.

Regards,
Confess/Meow11

[danmal]

Yep.  Make them agree to it when they upload it, unless they specify something else.

I can't see a system like this working very well to be honest. Someone might forget to include the copyright file or accidently screw it up so the server doesn't read it and suddenly they've released their work under a potentially incompatible licence or worse a licence they don't agree with. Why not simply list the licence type as unknown in that case or refuse to upload the map?

I'd be wary of putting too many restrictions on such a system however or you might find very few people using it.

[David]

Yep.  Make them agree to it when they upload it, unless they specify something else.

I can't see a system like this working very well to be honest. Someone might forget to include the copyright file or accidently screw it up so the server doesn't read it and suddenly they've released their work under a potentially incompatible licence or worse a licence they don't agree with. Why not simply list the licence type as unknown in that case or refuse to upload the map?

I'd be wary of putting too many restrictions on such a system however or you might find very few people using it.

We're legally obliged to get permission to redistribute you map.  If you don't let us, then we can't host it without breaking the law.
cc-by-nc-nd is basically that, we can redistribute it and use it however we like, but no selling or derivatives.  Make them agree to that so we and other server owners can legally use it, and then they can add a licence file if they want to offer it under other terms.