Reply to Re: New Files: Lazy Post
If you don't have an account, just leave the password field blank.
It is nice to see FreeDink on the front page, albeit with no description. I'm perplexed by the community's apparently disinterest in FreeDink, so I will present a description.
FreeDink is not a Linux port of Dink but a rewrite of the Dink engine (i.e. Dink.exe). A rewrite was necessary because the original code was too messy and inefficient to make expansion (e.g. adding new features) feasible. It works on both Linux and Windows.
The "free" and "GNU" in "GNU FreeDink" implies that FreeDink adheres to the ideals of GNU/Linux/open-source movement. This means that the license agreement ensures that FreeDink is very close to being public domain. The source is freely downloaded and anyone can submit contributions for Beuc to approve and add to FreeDink.
As FreeDink is functionally a clone of Dink, FreeDink may be currently uninteresting for most. However, we now have a clean base to work off and a programmer (Beuc) who is active in the community and understands the code. Therefore, extensions such as a proper scripting language is relatively easy and certainly now viable.
Unless I mention Windemere this post will not be complete. I do not understand Merlin's motives for resurrecting Windemere instead of contributing to FreeDink. I submit that FreeDink is a superior project to Windemere because a) FreeDink runs the original DMODs, and b) FreeDink is open to community and collaboration (GNU).
By deciding to support reverse-compatibility despite the difficulty in doing this, Beuc ensued that our DMODs won't be forgotten. FreeDink is really Dink in both form and spirit, and it has the potential to be modernised.
Windemere, in comparison to FreeDink, appears to be an individual's project that bears the Dink name primarily for pragmatic reasons. I was hitherto reticent on Windemere, even in light of the enigmatic disparity in the community responses to FreeDink and Windemere, because I do not know Merlin's motive for ignoring FreeDink.
I believe that Beuc's FreeDink contribution to Dink is only surpassed by redink's collective contributions. Just as redink extended Dink's life by many years, FreeDink may continue Dink into the future if it is nurtured. Any project that does not run the old DMODs can not do this.
I would like Windemere to succeed. I mean no malice towards Merlin, and would not refer to FreeDink/Windemere competition if Merlin did not talk as if FreeDink did not exist (e.g. Windemere is "the next generation of that which is Dink" without mention of FreeDink). I only argue that if people are so interested in Windemere they should be even more excited by FreeDink; I don't understand why they aren't.
FreeDink is not a Linux port of Dink but a rewrite of the Dink engine (i.e. Dink.exe). A rewrite was necessary because the original code was too messy and inefficient to make expansion (e.g. adding new features) feasible. It works on both Linux and Windows.
The "free" and "GNU" in "GNU FreeDink" implies that FreeDink adheres to the ideals of GNU/Linux/open-source movement. This means that the license agreement ensures that FreeDink is very close to being public domain. The source is freely downloaded and anyone can submit contributions for Beuc to approve and add to FreeDink.
As FreeDink is functionally a clone of Dink, FreeDink may be currently uninteresting for most. However, we now have a clean base to work off and a programmer (Beuc) who is active in the community and understands the code. Therefore, extensions such as a proper scripting language is relatively easy and certainly now viable.
Unless I mention Windemere this post will not be complete. I do not understand Merlin's motives for resurrecting Windemere instead of contributing to FreeDink. I submit that FreeDink is a superior project to Windemere because a) FreeDink runs the original DMODs, and b) FreeDink is open to community and collaboration (GNU).
By deciding to support reverse-compatibility despite the difficulty in doing this, Beuc ensued that our DMODs won't be forgotten. FreeDink is really Dink in both form and spirit, and it has the potential to be modernised.
Windemere, in comparison to FreeDink, appears to be an individual's project that bears the Dink name primarily for pragmatic reasons. I was hitherto reticent on Windemere, even in light of the enigmatic disparity in the community responses to FreeDink and Windemere, because I do not know Merlin's motive for ignoring FreeDink.
I believe that Beuc's FreeDink contribution to Dink is only surpassed by redink's collective contributions. Just as redink extended Dink's life by many years, FreeDink may continue Dink into the future if it is nurtured. Any project that does not run the old DMODs can not do this.
I would like Windemere to succeed. I mean no malice towards Merlin, and would not refer to FreeDink/Windemere competition if Merlin did not talk as if FreeDink did not exist (e.g. Windemere is "the next generation of that which is Dink" without mention of FreeDink). I only argue that if people are so interested in Windemere they should be even more excited by FreeDink; I don't understand why they aren't.
