Is Bukkit really discontinued?

Discussion in 'Bukkit Discussion' started by Jinli, Oct 25, 2014.


Do we?

  1. Yes unfortunately

  2. Nope. you can stay on bukkit

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. lycano There are multiple way that Bukkit can survive (much longer). You just won't have the old CraftBukkit + Bukkit most likely.

    Probably check out what the Spigot team is doing. In addition you might have Glowstone (some day...) and compatibility layers/plugins with other mods. It can't be excluded that with the refforts of the Spigot project the lifetime of the ecosystem will be much longer. I am curious how things will go concerning "who is Bukkit".
  2. Offline


    asofold well i do not want to switch to another project. I could have done that a month ago but i keep looking at bukkit and ask the same question. I still dont know what really happened everything is unofficial right now and if feel left alone. Of course Bukkit can survive as long as the community has interest in it. I think that members still support bukkit at least try because of their friends they made here on bukkit.

    I really hope that im totally wrong with what i said in my previous post regarding bukkit.
  3. As far as i understand, Spigot will simply provide Bukkit plugin support natively, as before. I am not sure, what parts of CB/B they are recoding, but i speculate on a legalized pair of CraftBukkit+Bukkit forks (/derivates/recoded-thing).
  4. Offline


    "Unencumbered." If they rewrite everything then they'll be free of the Bukkit licensing, but they'll still be at the mercy of Mojang.
  5. Who cares? All modding is always at the mercy of the company that makes the game, even with extra licensing for "modding only", the company could prevent future modding at any given point of time. Looking at how the community reacts towards the latest version not being ready, that would be pretty much the same as shutting down all past modding as well. Now ironically people have not been saved from anything yet.
    mactso likes this.
  6. Offline


    Modding is a hard, stressful life filled with lawyers and Cease and Desist notices. I speak from experience. :)
  7. Why did people start to do it at all under these circumstances, what's been the purpose of their project? Is it reasonable to assert the concerns coming true, and to assert judgement over other other people who contributed to the project, either directly by contributing code or indirectly by writing plugins?

    There has been no indication that modding would be treated differently, except indirect ones like Microsoft buying Mojang, if you will. It's a just cause to demand clarification, but it's a hell stupid move to try to take it down yourself, these people are mistaken in trying to kill it instead of just dropping it. Mojang can still play the "evil card" and be subject to all kinds of complaints and hate, but now Bukkit lead-people have made themselves valid targets. It's not rescuing people, it's dumb.

    You just don't mod if you want total freedom.
  8. Offline


    Well it still doesn't change the fact I need craftbukkit 1.7.10 somehow so I can use plugins on my 1.7.10 server unless there is another way, It also doesn't change the same fact that other people have the same problem.
  9. Offline


    It also doesn't change the fact that that is purly your own problem. You have to understand it is now officially illegal to distribute CraftBukkit files.
    This whole situation has hurt a large part of the community, yourself included.
  10. Offline


    Was there a court ruling that I missed?
  11. Offline


    No it isn't. A DMCA takedown request is not a court ruling. It only binds the recipient of that request, and even then the recipient can file a DMCA counter-notice. If that happens, Wesley Wolfe will have 21 days to sue Mojang. If he doesn't the files will come back online.
  12. Offline


    Wouldn't Bukkit have to counter him, not Mojang?
  13. Offline


    Mojang owns Bukkit, and the DMCA was against Mojang from what I know.
  14. Mojang is for sure affected, since they own rights to parts of Bukkit (at least name, repositories, forums, as it seems), thus it is safe to assume that they would be "in charge" to file a counter notice, however that could also apply to GitHub, other contributors, Curse (in case of the download sites). The "direction" of the DMCA is probably a controversial aspect, as it first and foremost hits the Bukkit project itself, which is the project Wolvereness contributed to himself (obviously). Maybe it has been "aimed" at Mojang, but i think that's speculation, what we know is that it hit the Bukkit project.
  15. Offline


    Since Bukkit is owned by Mojang, the DMCA counter-notice filed to would come from Mojang. Bukkit isn't a separate legal entity.

    Anyone that distributed Bukkit code could receive a DMCA takedown request and file a DMCA counter-notice. That's the nature of open source.
    DrPyroCupcake likes this.
  16. Offline


    Strictly speaking it hit an implementation of one of the sections of the Bukkit project. But I from what I read in the notice, Wesley Wolfe's complaint was against an action made by Mojang.
  17. You can not reduce Bukkti to an API-project, designing for the dusk/dawn of things, waiting for "an implementation" to grow on one of the nearby hedges. This hit the core of the project with downloads and the CraftBukkit server code, all tied together with the API. They designed an API with great care for good reasons, but you can't separate it from CraftBukkit, in terms of "project". One would not exist without the other.
    The DMCA takes down downloads and code repositories that Wolverness claims to be infringing on his copyrights, by coincidence the infringing code happens to be within CraftBukkit, one of the repositories he had contributed a lot to. According to the DMCA Mojang comes in with not having put the "code resulting from decompilation of the Minecraft server" under a GPL-compatible license.

    You may or may not read more from the DMCA, concerning what it may be aiming for, but basically where it hits, would be the Bukkit project and community, as well as projects and communities depending on CraftBukkit. If Mojang is much affected as a company, may well be doubted.
  18. Offline


    The DMCA really had nothing to do with Mojang. Wesley issued the DMCA to the craftbukkit hosting provider, complaiming that his copyright was being infringed by the distribution of craftbukkit. The person who was responsible for uploading craftbukkit to the hosting provider (EvilSeph?) can issue a counter-claim, and would potentially also be the one that ends up getting sued if Wesley decides to take it that far. I don't believe Mojang is either the provider or the uploader of the files. In essence, Wesley's action was against other members of the bukkit team.

    A lot of people get side tracked by the phrase "owns the project", but it's really irrelevant to the current situation. In the case of bukkit/craftbukkit, I do not believe Mojang has anything to do with the distribution of craftbukkit files.
  19. Offline


    It has everything to do with Mojang because Mojang owns and controls Bukkit. The publisher of the files Wesley Wolfe demanded to be taken offline is Mojang. EvilSeph could not file a DMCA counter-notice because he's no longer involved in the project. His accounts here were removed. If anyone files a counter-notice on behalf of Bukkit, they would have to be authorized to do so by Mojang.

    But there is one complication: Because Bukkit is open source, other parties could create derivative versions and distribute them, and if Wolfe filed a takedown against them, they would be able to file a counter-notice at their choosing. Spigot is in that situation.
  20. Offline


  21. Offline


    It's nowhere near as easy to install as it used to be. :p
    bwfcwalshy likes this.
  22. Offline


    True, but the new method does completely avoid the DMCA issue.
  23. Offline


    Not necessarily. :C It still uses @Wolverness' source code, apparently.
  24. Offline


    I think it's too soon to know if it avoids the DMCA issue. That could be a very expensive legal question.

    Personally, I think it's not worth pursuing (months of time and thousands if not tens of thousands in legal fees to pursue and you won't see a dime back since the target is a donation run organization with no assets*) it and there is already a working copy of the minecraft server with bukkit api out for people to use and many of the critical plugins are already working now only 2 days after release.

    Mojang is much more likely to have their API done by 1.9 (since they have already been working on the backend of the API for 1.8).

    OTH, The Spigot jar was pretty trivial to build and use. Basically a 3 step process following the written directions. And, once you have it set up, rebuilding is probably easier than locating and downloading a jar file somewhere since you just double click a batch file already on your machine and out pops the jar file based on the most recent source code locally. Takes about 10 minutes.

    *When I was younger, I was rear-ended by someone with no insurance and no assets. The judge said, "I'm awarding you a $25,000 judgement. Good luck on ever seeing a dime of it." I think this is a similar situation.
  25. Offline


    Using his source code isn't the issue. Combining his source code with non-GPL code and distributing the two as a bundle was the problem. Spigot isn't doing that anymore.

    Specifically, the DMCA was issued against the distribution of craftbukkit.jar. The new version of Spigot does not distribute craftbukkit.jar at all.
  26. Shaggy67 From what I gather, Wolvereness has terminated his license, though, so his code cannot be used without his permission.
  27. Offline


    Basically what's going on is instead of Spigot adding the source codes and uploading it, it's having you do that. It seems like a series of jumped hoops, however I'm still unsure if it's legal.
  28. Offline


    You can't revoke a GPL license after it's already been granted to somebody. The termination clause he's talking about is a clause that only apply's if somebody is violating the GPL, which Spigot isn't in this case.
  29. Shaggy67 However it was, so he permanently terminated the license.
  30. Offline


    I've read either on the GPL's site or on FSF's site that distributing the source code separately and letting the end user combine them is perfectly legal. I don't have any links to that though, I'd have to hunt them down again.

    The termination clause only lasts until they come back in to compliance, which they are now.

    I know Wolvereness wants to be able to say that nobody is allowed to use his code anymore. However, the GPL specifically prevents developers from doing that. You can't contribute your code to the open source community and then change your mind later and take it all back. It doesn't work that way.
    Inscrutable likes this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page