LÖVE

The libraries I use for games are client-facing because I have to give credit to library authors. That is a situation where the names of libraries like AnAL and Cock et alia become a problem.

Because people actually read those LICENSE files.

The libraries I use for games are client-facing because I have to give credit to library authors. That is a situation where the names of libraries like AnAL and Cock et alia become a problem.

You can change their names and still give credit to the authors. Pretty much all libraries let you do this.

Just thought I'd throw my two cents on this.

I understand ejmr's concerns. Personally, it is not that I don't like these names, because I actually do. It is because people outside of this community might not. As OttoRobba pointed it out, it is a matter of making the framework accessible to anyone.

I think löve has the potential to grow outside its community and become a viable tool for game development; however, that world is usually filled with very stern people that might be easily offended by absurdities such as “dirty” library names. I wouldn't like such trivialities to take away credibility from the framework.

I know these libraries are not part of the official API, but some of them are very used and may be considered very close to the framework.

Guys, surely we can discuss this without resorting to name-calling (telling people to grow up, calling them unfit to associate with humans, WTF?).

Also, ejmr is a LÖVE user like everyone else. He has joined the forum earlier and has more posts than some people in this thread. So I think it's kinda wrong to oppose "this community" and ejmr when he's actually part of it like any of us here.

verilog wrote:I think löve has the potential to grow outside its community and become a viable tool for game development

It already has and it already is.

@ejmr

A lot of statements are being thrown around here, and there's one question that certainly is being avoided: Would changing the library names attract more developers that the community is interested in having?

We can talk about attracting educational or corporate folks or less underage children, but this is not what I see as the point. The point is there is very little evidence, and information that has been provided by either side has been very anecdotal.

If you really want to help the love community, provide forks of these libraries! You could do the following (or some variant that achieves the same goal):

1. Fork all the libraries that are open source with an offending name, and rename them to something that you would consider more helpful. There aren't that many libraries, and changing package names isn't hard. Just be sure to credit the original author.
2. Add a wiki page something along the line of, "Renamed Libraries (Forks)" and link them there.

This is an open source community. If you want it to change, you need to do work yourself. If people like what they see, they will follow!

slime wrote:

verilog wrote:I think löve has the potential to grow outside its community and become a viable tool for game development

It already has and it already is.

Surely it can grow a little bit more.

Everything can grow more.

slime wrote:Everything can grow more.

Everything. @u@

Is that sort of comment acceptable in this thread?

josefnpat wrote:@ejmr

A lot of statements are being thrown around here, and there's one question that certainly is being avoided: Would changing the library names attract more developers that the community is interested in having?

Good questions.

Would it attract more developers? I have no data to back up this claim, but I will say yes. At the very least I would suggest LÖVE to developers more often, and if others feel the same that increases its word-of-mouth advertising.

Would it attract more developers that the community is interested in having? That question feels too loaded for me to want to approach. I was not aware of a bar to which we were holding potential developers for their admission or anything like that.

We can talk about attracting educational or corporate folks or less underage children, but this is not what I see as the point. The point is there is very little evidence, and information that has been provided by either side has been very anecdotal.

I agree regard the lack of any evidence, particularly in the form of hard data.

If you really want to help the love community, provide forks of these libraries! You could do the following (or some variant that achieves the same goal):

1. Fork all the libraries that are open source with an offending name, and rename them to something that you would consider more helpful. There aren't that many libraries, and changing package names isn't hard. Just be sure to credit the original author.
2. Add a wiki page something along the line of, "Renamed Libraries (Forks)" and link them there.

This is an open source community. If you want it to change, you need to do work yourself. If people like what they see, they will follow!

Thanks for the idea. I will think about it.