librelist archives

« back to archive

Maps

Maps

From:
William Bowers
Date:
2012-09-20 @ 16:13
Hey all. I had a few long-term ideas for maps:

   1. Mapp Store (GET IT?! :P) -- This doesn't necessarily have to be a
   place where maps are bought and sold with real money, but at the very least
   people can share their own maps with screenshots, descriptions, clues for
   things to find, a comments section, lists of servers running the map (the
   list could be populated by the servers themselves if they communicate with
   the store server), etc. Maps would need UUIDs.
   2. Random map generation -- We could create potentially enormous maps
   with lots of stuff to do with the right world generation algorithm.
   3. Map linking -- You could take any number of maps and link them
   together using pathways on the edges of those maps to create new, even
   bigger maps.
   4. Distance travel -- If we have really large maps in the future, we can
   implement a transportation system of some kind (like air or subterranean
   travel).

-- 
-William

Re: [browserquest] Maps

From:
Brynn
Date:
2012-09-20 @ 19:54
I think these are all really cool ideas. Something that was sort of my
long-term goal that incorporates a lot of these ideas is real-time map
editing by players in addition to an extremely large available map
size that can increase in size as the playerbase needs more space.
Instead of having users import maps they made on Tiled or whatever,
give them in-game tools like shovels to manipulate dirt/water tiles,
seeds to place trees or grass, and the ability to place buildings. The
map could be large enough that everyone could stake out their own
claim and build their own little town if they wanted.

I think starting with your ideas would be the logical steps towards
what I wrote above. I haven't had a chance to look but I read that
importing Tiled maps into BQ doesn't work since there's some missing
tool used to convert the map that the devs didn't release. So getting
easy map importation would be cool in addition to your other features.

Brynn

On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 9:13 AM, William Bowers
<william.bowers@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey all. I had a few long-term ideas for maps:
>
> Mapp Store (GET IT?! :P) -- This doesn't necessarily have to be a place
> where maps are bought and sold with real money, but at the very least people
> can share their own maps with screenshots, descriptions, clues for things to
> find, a comments section, lists of servers running the map (the list could
> be populated by the servers themselves if they communicate with the store
> server), etc. Maps would need UUIDs.
> Random map generation -- We could create potentially enormous maps with lots
> of stuff to do with the right world generation algorithm.
> Map linking -- You could take any number of maps and link them together
> using pathways on the edges of those maps to create new, even bigger maps.
> Distance travel -- If we have really large maps in the future, we can
> implement a transportation system of some kind (like air or subterranean
> travel).
>
> --
> -William

Re: [browserquest] Maps

From:
William Bowers
Date:
2012-09-20 @ 21:25
I absolutely LOVE the idea of in-game map editing when the editing is part
of the gameplay and not like swaping "tiles". The way you described it
reminds me a lot of Minecraft (farming, building, digging). You have items,
rather than having a "map editing menu". I think this has a lot of
potential and, in my opinion, we could actually implement some of these
ideas pretty easily, like planting seeds and having them grow into a plant.

On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 12:54 PM, Brynn <brynnbateman@gmail.com> wrote:

> I think these are all really cool ideas. Something that was sort of my
> long-term goal that incorporates a lot of these ideas is real-time map
> editing by players in addition to an extremely large available map
> size that can increase in size as the playerbase needs more space.
> Instead of having users import maps they made on Tiled or whatever,
> give them in-game tools like shovels to manipulate dirt/water tiles,
> seeds to place trees or grass, and the ability to place buildings. The
> map could be large enough that everyone could stake out their own
> claim and build their own little town if they wanted.
>
> I think starting with your ideas would be the logical steps towards
> what I wrote above. I haven't had a chance to look but I read that
> importing Tiled maps into BQ doesn't work since there's some missing
> tool used to convert the map that the devs didn't release. So getting
> easy map importation would be cool in addition to your other features.
>
> Brynn
>
> On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 9:13 AM, William Bowers
> <william.bowers@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hey all. I had a few long-term ideas for maps:
> >
> > Mapp Store (GET IT?! :P) -- This doesn't necessarily have to be a place
> > where maps are bought and sold with real money, but at the very least
> people
> > can share their own maps with screenshots, descriptions, clues for
> things to
> > find, a comments section, lists of servers running the map (the list
> could
> > be populated by the servers themselves if they communicate with the store
> > server), etc. Maps would need UUIDs.
> > Random map generation -- We could create potentially enormous maps with
> lots
> > of stuff to do with the right world generation algorithm.
> > Map linking -- You could take any number of maps and link them together
> > using pathways on the edges of those maps to create new, even bigger
> maps.
> > Distance travel -- If we have really large maps in the future, we can
> > implement a transportation system of some kind (like air or subterranean
> > travel).
> >
> > --
> > -William
>



-- 
-William

Re: [browserquest] Maps

From:
Brynn
Date:
2012-09-20 @ 21:29
Cool, I'm glad you like it. Simply getting the code written to allow
tiles to update in real time and stored in a database would add a ton
of flexibility to the game. Adding features to manipulate the tiles
after that shouldn't be hard at all (like Harvest Moon style farming,
etc). I'm sort of in the process of getting more familiar with
JavaScript and the existing code base, so it will likely be a while
until I can contribute in any meaningful way, but I'll hopefully get
to that point ASAP.

On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 2:25 PM, William Bowers
<william.bowers@gmail.com> wrote:
> I absolutely LOVE the idea of in-game map editing when the editing is part
> of the gameplay and not like swaping "tiles". The way you described it
> reminds me a lot of Minecraft (farming, building, digging). You have items,
> rather than having a "map editing menu". I think this has a lot of potential
> and, in my opinion, we could actually implement some of these ideas pretty
> easily, like planting seeds and having them grow into a plant.
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 12:54 PM, Brynn <brynnbateman@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I think these are all really cool ideas. Something that was sort of my
>> long-term goal that incorporates a lot of these ideas is real-time map
>> editing by players in addition to an extremely large available map
>> size that can increase in size as the playerbase needs more space.
>> Instead of having users import maps they made on Tiled or whatever,
>> give them in-game tools like shovels to manipulate dirt/water tiles,
>> seeds to place trees or grass, and the ability to place buildings. The
>> map could be large enough that everyone could stake out their own
>> claim and build their own little town if they wanted.
>>
>> I think starting with your ideas would be the logical steps towards
>> what I wrote above. I haven't had a chance to look but I read that
>> importing Tiled maps into BQ doesn't work since there's some missing
>> tool used to convert the map that the devs didn't release. So getting
>> easy map importation would be cool in addition to your other features.
>>
>> Brynn
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 9:13 AM, William Bowers
>> <william.bowers@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Hey all. I had a few long-term ideas for maps:
>> >
>> > Mapp Store (GET IT?! :P) -- This doesn't necessarily have to be a place
>> > where maps are bought and sold with real money, but at the very least
>> > people
>> > can share their own maps with screenshots, descriptions, clues for
>> > things to
>> > find, a comments section, lists of servers running the map (the list
>> > could
>> > be populated by the servers themselves if they communicate with the
>> > store
>> > server), etc. Maps would need UUIDs.
>> > Random map generation -- We could create potentially enormous maps with
>> > lots
>> > of stuff to do with the right world generation algorithm.
>> > Map linking -- You could take any number of maps and link them together
>> > using pathways on the edges of those maps to create new, even bigger
>> > maps.
>> > Distance travel -- If we have really large maps in the future, we can
>> > implement a transportation system of some kind (like air or subterranean
>> > travel).
>> >
>> > --
>> > -William
>
>
>
>
> --
> -William

Re: [browserquest] Maps

From:
William Bowers
Date:
2012-09-20 @ 21:41
If there is consensus I will add this to the Backlog. Any objections or
additions?

On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 2:29 PM, Brynn <brynnbateman@gmail.com> wrote:

> Cool, I'm glad you like it. Simply getting the code written to allow
> tiles to update in real time and stored in a database would add a ton
> of flexibility to the game. Adding features to manipulate the tiles
> after that shouldn't be hard at all (like Harvest Moon style farming,
> etc). I'm sort of in the process of getting more familiar with
> JavaScript and the existing code base, so it will likely be a while
> until I can contribute in any meaningful way, but I'll hopefully get
> to that point ASAP.
>
> On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 2:25 PM, William Bowers
> <william.bowers@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I absolutely LOVE the idea of in-game map editing when the editing is
> part
> > of the gameplay and not like swaping "tiles". The way you described it
> > reminds me a lot of Minecraft (farming, building, digging). You have
> items,
> > rather than having a "map editing menu". I think this has a lot of
> potential
> > and, in my opinion, we could actually implement some of these ideas
> pretty
> > easily, like planting seeds and having them grow into a plant.
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 12:54 PM, Brynn <brynnbateman@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> I think these are all really cool ideas. Something that was sort of my
> >> long-term goal that incorporates a lot of these ideas is real-time map
> >> editing by players in addition to an extremely large available map
> >> size that can increase in size as the playerbase needs more space.
> >> Instead of having users import maps they made on Tiled or whatever,
> >> give them in-game tools like shovels to manipulate dirt/water tiles,
> >> seeds to place trees or grass, and the ability to place buildings. The
> >> map could be large enough that everyone could stake out their own
> >> claim and build their own little town if they wanted.
> >>
> >> I think starting with your ideas would be the logical steps towards
> >> what I wrote above. I haven't had a chance to look but I read that
> >> importing Tiled maps into BQ doesn't work since there's some missing
> >> tool used to convert the map that the devs didn't release. So getting
> >> easy map importation would be cool in addition to your other features.
> >>
> >> Brynn
> >>
> >> On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 9:13 AM, William Bowers
> >> <william.bowers@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > Hey all. I had a few long-term ideas for maps:
> >> >
> >> > Mapp Store (GET IT?! :P) -- This doesn't necessarily have to be a
> place
> >> > where maps are bought and sold with real money, but at the very least
> >> > people
> >> > can share their own maps with screenshots, descriptions, clues for
> >> > things to
> >> > find, a comments section, lists of servers running the map (the list
> >> > could
> >> > be populated by the servers themselves if they communicate with the
> >> > store
> >> > server), etc. Maps would need UUIDs.
> >> > Random map generation -- We could create potentially enormous maps
> with
> >> > lots
> >> > of stuff to do with the right world generation algorithm.
> >> > Map linking -- You could take any number of maps and link them
> together
> >> > using pathways on the edges of those maps to create new, even bigger
> >> > maps.
> >> > Distance travel -- If we have really large maps in the future, we can
> >> > implement a transportation system of some kind (like air or
> subterranean
> >> > travel).
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > -William
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > -William
>



-- 
-William

Re: [browserquest] Maps

From:
Justin Clift
Date:
2012-09-20 @ 23:29
On 21/09/2012, at 7:41 AM, William Bowers wrote:
> If there is consensus I will add this to the Backlog. Any objections or 
additions?

Go for it. :)

As a "practical" next step, it might be interesting for us to add some kind of
"map chooser".

Conceptually working like this:

 a) The server has a list of several maps it knows about (user contributed
    hopefully :>).

 b) When the client connects, the server passes it the list of available maps
    (map id, friendly name -> "Mo's map", and description -> "This is Mo's
    Warg hunting map").

 c) The client has some kind of UI where the user can choose between maps.

    ie From the very start of the game "choose which map to start in", and
       also some way to change mid game (Options -> Change map type of
       thing?)

 d) The user picks a map, the client sends it to the server, and the server
    uses the new map for that client.

    So yeah, I guess this means each server must be able to handle multiple
    maps.  Or maybe fork a new Node.js server with the different map, and
    we have some kind of broker mechanism?

So... where to get maps?

Personally, I reckon we try for an approach which needs _very_ low effort
from contributors.  Something like:

 a) People fork the GitHub repo, then make their own maps.
 b) Either they make a pull request to us with the new maps, or just let
    us know of their own map any other way, so we can copy it from them.

That would potentially give us a bunch of maps in the tools/maps/ dir for
use.

Though, there's probably no real reason we have to have maps in our repo.
Might be just as easy to load maps from other GitHub repos live, instead
of needing to copy them.

Thoughts?

:)

Regards and best wishes,

Justin Clift

--
Aeolus Community Manager
http://www.aeolusproject.org

Re: [browserquest] Maps

From:
William Bowers
Date:
2012-09-20 @ 23:46
That process for choosing maps sounds good. A similar option:

   - Have a "map selection" or "start" screen.
   - Open a map.
   - Exit the map, back to the start screen.
   - Open a different map.

It would be nice to have a few super high quality, curated maps that
BrowserQuest ships with. Those could be in the repo or available as a
separate download.

Once we get a website setup for BrowserQuest (another item to add to the
Backlog) we could have a way of submitting and downloading maps. For now,
though, the repo should be fine. It will keep the process light while we
ramp up.

On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 4:29 PM, Justin Clift <jclift@redhat.com> wrote:

> On 21/09/2012, at 7:41 AM, William Bowers wrote:
> > If there is consensus I will add this to the Backlog. Any objections or
> additions?
>
> Go for it. :)
>
> As a "practical" next step, it might be interesting for us to add some
> kind of
> "map chooser".
>
> Conceptually working like this:
>
>  a) The server has a list of several maps it knows about (user contributed
>     hopefully :>).
>
>  b) When the client connects, the server passes it the list of available
> maps
>     (map id, friendly name -> "Mo's map", and description -> "This is Mo's
>     Warg hunting map").
>
>  c) The client has some kind of UI where the user can choose between maps.
>
>     ie From the very start of the game "choose which map to start in", and
>        also some way to change mid game (Options -> Change map type of
>        thing?)
>
>  d) The user picks a map, the client sends it to the server, and the server
>     uses the new map for that client.
>
>     So yeah, I guess this means each server must be able to handle multiple
>     maps.  Or maybe fork a new Node.js server with the different map, and
>     we have some kind of broker mechanism?
>
> So... where to get maps?
>
> Personally, I reckon we try for an approach which needs _very_ low effort
> from contributors.  Something like:
>
>  a) People fork the GitHub repo, then make their own maps.
>  b) Either they make a pull request to us with the new maps, or just let
>     us know of their own map any other way, so we can copy it from them.
>
> That would potentially give us a bunch of maps in the tools/maps/ dir for
> use.
>
> Though, there's probably no real reason we have to have maps in our repo.
> Might be just as easy to load maps from other GitHub repos live, instead
> of needing to copy them.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> :)
>
> Regards and best wishes,
>
> Justin Clift
>
> --
> Aeolus Community Manager
> http://www.aeolusproject.org
>
>


-- 
-William

Re: [browserquest] Maps

From:
Justin Clift
Date:
2012-09-21 @ 00:04
On 21/09/2012, at 9:46 AM, William Bowers wrote:
> That process for choosing maps sounds good. A similar option:
> 	• Have a "map selection" or "start" screen.
> 	• Open a map.
> 	• Exit the map, back to the start screen.
> 	• Open a different map.

Ahhh yeah, that would be simpler to implement, and achieve the
same result. :)


> It would be nice to have a few super high quality, curated maps that 
BrowserQuest ships with. Those could be in the repo or available as a 
separate download.

Yep, agreed.


> Once we get a website setup for BrowserQuest (another item to add to the
Backlog) we could have a way of submitting and downloading maps. For now, 
though, the repo should be fine. It will keep the process light while we 
ramp up.

Ahhh, that reminds me.  Tom McKay, the other Red Hat guy on the
BQ project, was looking to add support for OpenShift (a Red Hat
sponsored(?) PaaS platform) to BQ.

We both reckon it would be kind of nifty, because OpenShift is
free for people on the lowest resource usage tier.  A BQ server
should fit into that easily. :)

  i.e. people can fork BQ, and run their own _public_ server
       for their fork, with no cost.

Though, there's absolutely no way we'd want to force that on
people.  It should just be an option for the people who would
have a use for it.

:)

Regards and best wishes,

Justin Clift

--
Aeolus Community Manager
http://www.aeolusproject.org

Re: [browserquest] Maps

From:
Brynn
Date:
2012-09-21 @ 00:07
It's also free to run on AWS's EC2; their lowest tier is free and
seems to be working fine. It's what I'm using.

On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 5:04 PM, Justin Clift <jclift@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 21/09/2012, at 9:46 AM, William Bowers wrote:
>> That process for choosing maps sounds good. A similar option:
>>       • Have a "map selection" or "start" screen.
>>       • Open a map.
>>       • Exit the map, back to the start screen.
>>       • Open a different map.
>
> Ahhh yeah, that would be simpler to implement, and achieve the
> same result. :)
>
>
>> It would be nice to have a few super high quality, curated maps that 
BrowserQuest ships with. Those could be in the repo or available as a 
separate download.
>
> Yep, agreed.
>
>
>> Once we get a website setup for BrowserQuest (another item to add to 
the Backlog) we could have a way of submitting and downloading maps. For 
now, though, the repo should be fine. It will keep the process light while
we ramp up.
>
> Ahhh, that reminds me.  Tom McKay, the other Red Hat guy on the
> BQ project, was looking to add support for OpenShift (a Red Hat
> sponsored(?) PaaS platform) to BQ.
>
> We both reckon it would be kind of nifty, because OpenShift is
> free for people on the lowest resource usage tier.  A BQ server
> should fit into that easily. :)
>
>   i.e. people can fork BQ, and run their own _public_ server
>        for their fork, with no cost.
>
> Though, there's absolutely no way we'd want to force that on
> people.  It should just be an option for the people who would
> have a use for it.
>
> :)
>
> Regards and best wishes,
>
> Justin Clift
>
> --
> Aeolus Community Manager
> http://www.aeolusproject.org
>

Re: [browserquest] Maps

From:
Justin Clift
Date:
2012-09-21 @ 00:10
On 21/09/2012, at 10:07 AM, Brynn wrote:
> It's also free to run on AWS's EC2; their lowest tier is free and
> seems to be working fine. It's what I'm using.

Ahhh cool.  I remember signing up for that ages (1 yr+) ago, but
then they sent me an email after some time saying it was no longer
going to be free.

Though... maybe I misunderstood something there.

Are you sure there's not a time limit on it or something?
(Note, I'm really not, I didn't look all that closely at it)

+ Justin

--
Aeolus Community Manager
http://www.aeolusproject.org

Re: [browserquest] Maps

From:
Brynn
Date:
2012-09-21 @ 00:14
Looks like you're right, Justin. The free tier lasts for a year, but
there's no usage limitations on it really in terms of what's needed
for BQ.

On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 5:10 PM, Justin Clift <jclift@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 21/09/2012, at 10:07 AM, Brynn wrote:
>> It's also free to run on AWS's EC2; their lowest tier is free and
>> seems to be working fine. It's what I'm using.
>
> Ahhh cool.  I remember signing up for that ages (1 yr+) ago, but
> then they sent me an email after some time saying it was no longer
> going to be free.
>
> Though... maybe I misunderstood something there.
>
> Are you sure there's not a time limit on it or something?
> (Note, I'm really not, I didn't look all that closely at it)
>
> + Justin
>
> --
> Aeolus Community Manager
> http://www.aeolusproject.org
>

Re: [browserquest] Maps

From:
Justin Clift
Date:
2012-09-21 @ 00:20
On 21/09/2012, at 10:14 AM, Brynn wrote:
> Looks like you're right, Justin. The free tier lasts for a year, but
> there's no usage limitations on it really in terms of what's needed
> for BQ.

Cool.  Still a year of free hosting is pretty decent too.

It's also pretty likely that the AWS free tier option is more powerful
(it's a proper vm) than the OpenShift "3 free gears" thing.

Note, though, I haven't done any benchmarking of them, so don't
quote me on that. ;)

+ Justin

--
Aeolus Community Manager
http://www.aeolusproject.org

Re: [browserquest] Maps

From:
William Bowers
Date:
2012-09-21 @ 00:29
The Maps feature has been added to the Backlog:
https://github.com/browserquest/BrowserQuest/wiki/Backlog

On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 5:20 PM, Justin Clift <jclift@redhat.com> wrote:

> On 21/09/2012, at 10:14 AM, Brynn wrote:
> > Looks like you're right, Justin. The free tier lasts for a year, but
> > there's no usage limitations on it really in terms of what's needed
> > for BQ.
>
> Cool.  Still a year of free hosting is pretty decent too.
>
> It's also pretty likely that the AWS free tier option is more powerful
> (it's a proper vm) than the OpenShift "3 free gears" thing.
>
> Note, though, I haven't done any benchmarking of them, so don't
> quote me on that. ;)
>
> + Justin
>
> --
> Aeolus Community Manager
> http://www.aeolusproject.org
>
>


-- 
-William

Re: [browserquest] Maps

From:
Brynn
Date:
2012-09-21 @ 00:34
Also, I'd be happy to setup a website to make things easier. If we
want to pick a project name, I'll register the domain and setup a
Drupal or Wordpress install. Having forums to communicate on would
probably be easier than the mailing list.

On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 5:29 PM, William Bowers
<william.bowers@gmail.com> wrote:
> The Maps feature has been added to the Backlog:
> https://github.com/browserquest/BrowserQuest/wiki/Backlog
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 5:20 PM, Justin Clift <jclift@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 21/09/2012, at 10:14 AM, Brynn wrote:
>> > Looks like you're right, Justin. The free tier lasts for a year, but
>> > there's no usage limitations on it really in terms of what's needed
>> > for BQ.
>>
>> Cool.  Still a year of free hosting is pretty decent too.
>>
>> It's also pretty likely that the AWS free tier option is more powerful
>> (it's a proper vm) than the OpenShift "3 free gears" thing.
>>
>> Note, though, I haven't done any benchmarking of them, so don't
>> quote me on that. ;)
>>
>> + Justin
>>
>> --
>> Aeolus Community Manager
>> http://www.aeolusproject.org
>>
>
>
>
> --
> -William

Re: [browserquest] Maps

From:
William Bowers
Date:
2012-09-21 @ 00:40
Do we want to stick with BQ for now for the project name? As Justin was
pointing out to me, it has good brand recognition that could come in handy.
I think we could only do that, though, if the mozilla BQ is officially
unsupported.

Re: [browserquest] Maps

From:
Justin Clift
Date:
2012-09-21 @ 00:48
On 21/09/2012, at 10:43 AM, Brynn wrote:
> The problem with sticking with BrowserQuest is that you might run into
> copyright issues. Technically either Mozilla has the rights to the
> name, even if it isn't registered and being actively protected. We
> could skirt around it and just called it ProjectBQ, and projectbq.com
> is available.

Um, I'm guessing you mean Trademark issues?

Interesting point.  I don't personally think we'd have issues, but
I'll ask the Moz trademark people, just to be safe. ;)

+ Justin

--
Aeolus Community Manager
http://www.aeolusproject.org

Re: [browserquest] Maps

From:
Brynn
Date:
2012-09-21 @ 00:49
Yes, sorry, I'm tired and had a few typos there.

On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 5:48 PM, Justin Clift <jclift@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 21/09/2012, at 10:43 AM, Brynn wrote:
>> The problem with sticking with BrowserQuest is that you might run into
>> copyright issues. Technically either Mozilla has the rights to the
>> name, even if it isn't registered and being actively protected. We
>> could skirt around it and just called it ProjectBQ, and projectbq.com
>> is available.
>
> Um, I'm guessing you mean Trademark issues?
>
> Interesting point.  I don't personally think we'd have issues, but
> I'll ask the Moz trademark people, just to be safe. ;)
>
> + Justin
>
> --
> Aeolus Community Manager
> http://www.aeolusproject.org
>

Re: [browserquest] Maps

From:
William Bowers
Date:
2012-09-21 @ 01:54
It's possible Mozilla would transfer the project to us, most likely after
we've implemented a few larger features and shown that we're moving the
project forward.

On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 5:49 PM, Brynn <brynnbateman@gmail.com> wrote:

> Yes, sorry, I'm tired and had a few typos there.
>
> On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 5:48 PM, Justin Clift <jclift@redhat.com> wrote:
> > On 21/09/2012, at 10:43 AM, Brynn wrote:
> >> The problem with sticking with BrowserQuest is that you might run into
> >> copyright issues. Technically either Mozilla has the rights to the
> >> name, even if it isn't registered and being actively protected. We
> >> could skirt around it and just called it ProjectBQ, and projectbq.com
> >> is available.
> >
> > Um, I'm guessing you mean Trademark issues?
> >
> > Interesting point.  I don't personally think we'd have issues, but
> > I'll ask the Moz trademark people, just to be safe. ;)
> >
> > + Justin
> >
> > --
> > Aeolus Community Manager
> > http://www.aeolusproject.org
> >
>



-- 
-William

Re: [browserquest] Maps

From:
Brynn
Date:
2012-09-21 @ 00:43
The problem with sticking with BrowserQuest is that you might run into
copyright issues. Technically either Mozilla has the rights to the
name, even if it isn't registered and being actively protected. We
could skirt around it and just called it ProjectBQ, and projectbq.com
is available.

On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 5:40 PM, William Bowers
<william.bowers@gmail.com> wrote:
> Do we want to stick with BQ for now for the project name? As Justin was
> pointing out to me, it has good brand recognition that could come in handy.
> I think we could only do that, though, if the mozilla BQ is officially
> unsupported.

Re: [browserquest] Maps

From:
William Bowers
Date:
2012-09-21 @ 00:10
>
> Ahhh, that reminds me.  Tom McKay, the other Red Hat guy on the
> BQ project, was looking to add support for OpenShift (a Red Hat
> sponsored(?) PaaS platform) to BQ.
>
> We both reckon it would be kind of nifty, because OpenShift is
> free for people on the lowest resource usage tier.  A BQ server
> should fit into that easily. :)
>
>   i.e. people can fork BQ, and run their own _public_ server
>        for their fork, with no cost.
>
> Though, there's absolutely no way we'd want to force that on
> people.  It should just be an option for the people who would
> have a use for it.


I love the idea of being able to quickly create a public BQ server using a
website, even if it's a temporary server. Toss in a public server list
somewhere and that's a real selling point (OK it's even great without the
server list :P).