[Release] Platform Conversion Utility (PCU)

[Salk]

Wounded Lion,

 

I might have overreacted about the importance of this tool created by Ascension64 calling it the biggest step ahead ever made by the BG community but it only compensates the indifference with which it seems to be welcomed by many users.

 

I don't think you realize the potential of this tool. We are going to have soon a *common* platform to develop mod on!

 

Isn't this a revolution ? I call it so and I am very grateful to Ascension64 for sharing PCU with us. Not to mention the infinite time saved in performing conversions!

 

Berelinde,

 

I don't agree with you either when you compare a mod converted by PCU to something potentially faulty that might make the original author angry. What makes you think and say that there is a chance it will convert the Mod without leaving its structure completely intact ? It's not that the Mod is going to be tweaked in any way. It'll be just converted. No hassles.

[NiGHTMARE]

Of course, converting a mod and actually distributing the results are two completely different things. It would be rather silly for mod author to object to someone else modifying their work if the changes will never appear anywhere other than the modifier's own hard drive.

[berelinde]

I don't agree with you either when you compare a mod converted by PCU to something potentially faulty that might make the original author angry. What makes you think and say that there is a chance it will convert the Mod without leaving its structure completely intact ? It's not that the Mod is going to be tweaked in any way. It'll be just converted. No hassles.

 

I'm not saying there would be any damage. I am just saying that I would be inclined to respect the refusal to have the conversion performed. Personally, I think it's a great tool, and am grateful that Ascension64 is willing to even let us know it exists.

 

I am also hoping that I might be able to take advantage of it soon. I don't know BGT at all!

 

If you disagree with me, that's OK too. I don't always take myself seriously, so I don't see why anyone else should. Opinions are just that.

[Ascension64]

Please note that the conversion of resources is not a full mod conversion, and Ascension64 never said he was controlling anything (or for that matter, rebuilding anything without permission) other than his own work. He is offering services to the larger community, not just BGT. Even after conversion of resources, there will need to be serious tinkering and partial rebuilds on almost any mod.

For tricky mods that touch on a wide range of existing code, like BG1NPC, much rebuilding is probably necessary. Since I haven't released the technical stuff yet, I shall at least reveal that the original mod is 'cloned', and so if you want to make a single installation that works for both BGT-WeiDU and BG1Tutu, then you would have to perform a partial, manual rebuild. PCU does all the otherwise tedious, boring stuff in a conversion, such as opening up every .CRE file in the mod and removing the ~ at the start of every ResRef. The other thing I should note is that the IR (internal release) of PCU used to convert BG1NPC was still the old Tutu2BGT converter, so there were a lot of erroneous and missed conversions back then. The program was restructured to acquire the capabilities of any kind of conversion, provided a dictionary is generated.

 

At the end of the day, some mods are harder to convert (in the overall sense, not just the ResRefs) depending on how deeply they tinker with existing resources. The easiest mods to convert, which become functional straight away without needing any rebuilding, would probably be mods that focus mostly on new content (e.g. NPC mods [indira NPC] or small quests [Lure of the Sirine's Call], only dabbling slightly with existing resources to fit the content in appropriately. But saying that, the strength of PCU is the ability to ensure that mods using existing resources (standard items, standard scripts, standard spells, etc.) can still use those resources when they are renamed, as is the case when you go from a BG1 platform to a BG1Tutu platform. So, if Fields of the Dead restructures most of the way BG1 works, the PCU can still help in porting it from the BG1 platform to BG1Tutu (no, I haven't tried converted FotD).

 

Of course, converting a mod and actually distributing the results are two completely different things. It would be rather silly for mod author to object to someone else modifying their work if the changes will never appear anywhere other than the modifier's own hard drive.

I wouldn't want to even consider the potential for the former leading to the latter by allowing the first to occur inappropriately.

 

We are going to have soon a *common* platform to develop mod on!

I thought that this would have been the merger poject, and the reason I expanded PCU was for this purpose, unless that is what you meant anyway.

 

...and am grateful that Ascension64 is willing to even let us know it exists.

Well, yes, I could have kept it to myself...

[NiGHTMARE]

I wouldn't want to even consider the potential for the former leading to the latter by allowing the first to occur inappropriately.

 

Sure, but how is this any different than any other IE utility, or for that matter any IE mod that uses COPY_EXISTING_REGEXP GLOB? Anyone could quite easily take f.ex Finch, add/delete/change a load of stuff, and then publically release the results. If they altered files via another mod that uses REGEXP GLOBs (installing all the BG2 Tweak Pack components will alter vast amounts of files from other mods, for example), they wouldn't even need to have very much modding knowledge.

 

I'm not saying you're wrong in what you're doing, I just genuinely can't 't see the difference.

[Ascension64]

I'm not saying you're wrong in what you're doing, I just genuinely can't 't see the difference.

The difference would be who is to blame. If person decided to manually convert Finch to BGT-WeiDU and release the results under their own name without permission from the original author, that person would probably get flamed, etc. However, if another person decided to ask me to convert Finch to BGT-WeiDU, I did it, then that person released the results without permission form the original author, then I would also be implicated. Perhaps it is a matter of self-protection, but an important one nevertheless. Who would be the one who performs the first scenario?

[Salk]

We are going to have soon a *common* platform to develop mod on!

I thought that this would have been the merger poject, and the reason I expanded PCU was for this purpose, unless that is what you meant anyway.

 

That was exactly what I meant! The merger project seems to be strongly connected to the PCU tool you have created as they both are leading to unification and universal modding. Great!

 

Berelinde,

 

I also try and not take myself too seriously and it's just a matter of opinions. What I can't agree about is to expect the PCU to possibly perform faulty conversion without having it seen it once at work. That's all...

[Wounded_Lion]

Several acidic comments come to mind... but instead I'll say this:

 

I don't need you or anyone else to police me.

 

AND

 

I support open source and open usage.

 

However, I have no use for your program... so I don't need to argue this point any further, do I?

 

- D

[NiGHTMARE]

The difference would be who is to blame. If person decided to manually convert Finch to BGT-WeiDU and release the results under their own name without permission from the original author, that person would probably get flamed, etc. However, if another person decided to ask me to convert Finch to BGT-WeiDU, I did it, then that person released the results without permission form the original author, then I would also be implicated. Perhaps it is a matter of self-protection, but an important one nevertheless. Who would be the one who performs the first scenario?

 

Err, I was talking about your reasons for not publically releasing this tool. If it were available for everyone, you would be no more responsible for what people did with it than Wesley Weimer or the Bigg would be for someone altering another person's mod via WeiDU and then distributing it without permission.

[Ascension64]

However, I have no use for your program... so I don't need to argue this point any further, do I?

Sure. That is your choice to make. However, if you cannot appreciate that I am at least providing something that can be of use because you think that I am presenting it in an unjustifiable manner (or perhaps you think something else is wrong with me), then that is a strange problem. Good luck on your mods.

 

Err, I was talking about your reasons for not publically releasing this tool. If it were available for everyone, you would be no more responsible for what people did with it than Wesley Weimer or the Bigg would be for someone altering another person's mod via WeiDU and then distributing it without permission.

And that is what I was also taking about. I don't actually agree with your comparation of PCU to WeiDU, since PCU is made specifically to work on mods. WeiDU was originally designed to work on BioWare material. That one can use WeiDU to modify mods too I consider a development from the original work.

 

Having said that I could relinquish all responsibility from the use of PCU if I do release it for public use. I don't feel it is necessary, however. I reiterate that if you do not want to use this utility because you think regulation of its use is base, then simply do not use it and do not ask me to use it. It is simply there IF people want to use it. If you want to flame me just because I'm trying to protect the personal interests of some authors out there, then do it. Just remember the forum rules. I don't see how I can 'abuse' someone by putting restrictions on PCU's usage. Explain.

[NiGHTMARE]

And that is what I was also taking about.

 

I'm afraid it really doesn't seem like it:

 

"However, if another person decided to ask me to convert Finch to BGT-WeiDU, I did it, then that person released the results without permission form the original author, then I would also be implicated".

 

If you were talking about other people running your utility rather than getting you to do it for them, there would be absolutely no difference in who to blame, and the answer to "who would be the one who performs the first scenario?" would be "exactly the same person who performs the second scenario".

 

I don't actually agree with your comparation of PCU to WeiDU, since PCU is made specifically to work on mods. WeiDU was originally designed to work on BioWare material. That one can use WeiDU to modify mods too I consider a development from the original work.

 

I'm fairly confident WeiDU has supported brand new files since its earliest versions - I certainly don't see how Solaufein or Kelsey could have been developed otherwise. Besides which, I'm not sure how whether or not a program was originally designed to perform a certain task has any bearing on the fact that the current version can.

 

Also, what of the other comparison I made earlier, that of mods such as tweak packs that will modify any file with certain properties (e.g. all .cre files that have a class of mage, or all .itm files that provide an AC bonus)? How is the potential for abuse of such mods any different than it is for PCU?

 

I reiterate that if you do not want to use this utility because you think regulation of its use is base, then simply do not use it and do not ask me to use it.

 

I never said I don't want to use this utility, and in fact I haven't even offered an opinion on whether or not I think you should release PCU or not. I simply think the reasons you have provided for not publically releasing them seem flawed, for two main reasons:

 

1) exactly the same arguments could be made for removing COPY_EXISTING_REGEXP GLOB from WeiDU, since it holds just as much potential for abuse of other peoples' mods.

 

2) the author of a program, utility, or mod is neither legally nor morally responsible for what the users do with it. He can tell the users what they are and aren't allowed to do with his creation, but if a user violate those terms then it's the user who is at fault, not the author. The author is only responsible if his creation does something the user doesn't want it do, e.g. delete the entire contents of his hard drive.

 

If you want to flame me just because I'm trying to protect the personal interests of some authors out there, then do it.

 

An opinion or perspective which simply happens to conflict with or call into question a view you hold is in absolutely no way, shape or form a 'flame'. A flame is a message that is deliberately hostile and insulting, such as something the lines of "stop being such a moron and release your damn utility already". Though many flamers would use far more obscene language than that.

 

I am not saying anything that is intended to be either hostile or insulting. There are no doubt other, perfectly valid and excellent reasons for not releasing PCU; I'm merely attempting to play devil's advocate by pointing out that the reasons you've currently provided don't seem to be all that solid. For me personally, "I don't want to release it" is a good enough reason.

 

Just remember the forum rules. I don't see how I can 'abuse' someone by putting restrictions on PCU's usage. Explain.

 

Where did anyone accuse you of 'abusing' them?

[Wounded_Lion]

Sure. That is your choice to make.

 

Yep.

 

...you think that I am presenting it in an unjustifiable manner

 

Yep.

 

...(or perhaps you think something else is wrong with me)...

 

Tempting, but I don't know you, so... No. lol.

 

Good luck on your mods.

 

Thank you. Good luck with your common-platform creation project and any mods that you might be working on.

 

- D

[Guest Guest]

And that is what I was also taking about.

 

I'm afraid it really doesn't seem like it:

 

"However, if another person decided to ask me to convert Finch to BGT-WeiDU, I did it, then that person released the results without permission form the original author, then I would also be implicated".

 

If you were talking about other people running your utility rather than getting you to do it for them, there would be absolutely no difference in who to blame, and the answer to "who would be the one who performs the first scenario?" would be "exactly the same person who performs the second scenario".

 

I don't actually agree with your comparation of PCU to WeiDU, since PCU is made specifically to work on mods. WeiDU was originally designed to work on BioWare material. That one can use WeiDU to modify mods too I consider a development from the original work.

 

I'm fairly confident WeiDU has supported brand new files since its earliest versions - I certainly don't see how Solaufein or Kelsey could have been developed otherwise. Besides which, I'm not sure how whether or not a program was originally designed to perform a certain task has any bearing on the fact that the current version can.

 

Also, what of the other comparison I made earlier, that of mods such as tweak packs that will modify any file with certain properties (e.g. all .cre files that have a class of mage, or all .itm files that provide an AC bonus)? How is the potential for abuse of such mods any different than it is for PCU?

 

I simply think the reasons you have provided for not publically releasing them seem flawed, for two main reasons:

 

1) exactly the same arguments could be made for removing COPY_EXISTING_REGEXP GLOB from WeiDU, since it holds just as much potential for abuse of other peoples' mods.

 

2) the author of a program, utility, or mod is neither legally nor morally responsible for what the users do with it. He can tell the users what they are and aren't allowed to do with his creation, but if a user violate those terms then it's the user who is at fault, not the author. The author is only responsible if his creation does something the user doesn't want it do, e.g. delete the entire contents of his hard drive.

...and so an army commander who creates a flawed battle plan that results in the total slaughter of all those under his charge is not legally nor morally responsible for those people who carry out the action. Sounds like chicken and egg to me.

 

As a utility/mod author I would feel responsible for what people do with them provided that they do not deliberately destroy their installation/hard drive/whatever by using it in ways not supposed to. And if the above analogy isn't enough, in real life people who have significant public presence (TV presenters, judges on TV, book/newspaper/journal authors) are continuously scrutinised for what they present to the community, because of the 'potential', and not necessarily realised, impact on the way that the community channels the information. Perhaps you might not agree with that either, and that is perfectly acceptable.

 

To your first point, I still think PCU directly implicates possible abuse but NONE OTHER. Perhaps it may change later, but you can't use PCU along to create an entirely new mod. WeiDU is much more than that, considering that PCU was written in WeiDU. Nevertheless, I think your second point is the more pertinent one to discuss.

 

I reiterate that if you do not want to use this utility because you think regulation of its use is base, then simply do not use it and do not ask me to use it.

 

I never said I don't want to use this utility, and in fact I haven't even offered an opinion on whether or not I think you should release PCU or not.

 

If you want to flame me just because I'm trying to protect the personal interests of some authors out there, then do it.

 

An opinion or perspective which simply happens to conflict with or call into question a view you hold is in absolutely no way, shape or form a 'flame'. A flame is a message that is deliberately hostile and insulting, such as something the lines of "stop being such a moron and release your damn utility already". Though many flamers would use far more obscene language than that.

 

I am not saying anything that is intended to be either hostile or insulting. There are no doubt other, perfectly valid and excellent reasons for not releasing PCU; I'm merely attempting to play devil's advocate by pointing out that the reasons you've currently provided don't seem to be all that solid. For me personally, "I don't want to release it" is a good enough reason.

 

Just remember the forum rules. I don't see how I can 'abuse' someone by putting restrictions on PCU's usage. Explain.

 

Where did anyone accuse you of 'abusing' them?

I wasn't directing what I said in those last sentences at anybody in particular, more of a general reflection on the situation. I don't believe anything you said was anything close to these, and if I suggested such, then I should have formatted my response better.

[Miloch]

@miloch: The older mods are definitely difficult to get permissions from as the author/s have probably left the scene a long while ago. I am still trying to figure out what can be done in these situations, but if it comes to making the conversion without the necessary permissions in this case, I think I will take the responsibility if the author/s become angry. Don't take this as granted just yet...I'm still thinking about what to do in these cases.

Most people would agree that modding is open source by definition:

Open source software - software whose source code is published and made available to the public, enabling anyone to copy, modify and redistribute the source code without paying royalties or fees. Open source code evolves through community cooperation.

[From Wikipedia]

Most such software, if it uses any sort of "license," uses something like the GNU General Public License:

GPL grants the recipients of a computer program the following rights:

* the right to run the program, for any desired purpose.

* the right to study how the program works, and modify it. (Access to the source code is a precondition for this)

* the right to redistribute copies

* the right to improve the program, and release the improvements to the public. (Access to the source code is a precondition for this)

[From Wikipedia]

My view of this is if:

 

1) You've developed something derivative (as all modding ultimately derives from the source of the original games)

2) You've released it to the community at large, including its inherent source code

3) You've released it free of charge (hard not to due for things as derivative as these)

4) You've put no restrictions on the reuse or translation of your work (hard to do for a derivative work anyhow)

5) You've kept it on there publicly, on a website, or allowed a host or forum to do so

6) You haven't responded to polite requests regarding the future of your work

 

Then essentially your work is fair game for anyone to modify as distribute as they please (even without the open source assumptions above). Common courtesy would dictate giving credit to the original author. I seriously doubt anyone would ever object to a conversion of a mod they developed if the above points were true. Particularly if that mod was simply debugged or updated to work on a modern or alternate platform.

 

Anyway... not to get bogged down in a load of mumbo-jumbo or drag this topic down further. But it seems a bit bizarre for anyone to be wary of repercussions of converting or updating a mod, as long as common sense is involved (e.g. don't convert a mod without permission of an active author who's still developing it). Though apparently something like that happened with the Vault a while back, and I don't think there were any repercussions.

 

If anything, the "modded mod" of the Vault is better than the author's revision from the sound of it, and the original author is said to be unavailable for at least another year, at the earliest.

 

As for the potential to "abuse" the use of a publicly-released tool, well, that could happen with anything. Look at all the viruses people've created in Microsoft Word due to the fact it makes its VB code transparent. Yet a lot of people use it for word processing.

 

So when are we seeing UB for Tutu... next week is it?

 

Yeah I know UB-BG1 still had outstanding bugs in the non-Tutu version last I checked. But someone pointed out a Tutu conversion would accelerate the bugfixing process since few people play the original BG1 still or would want to modify their BG1 installations.

[Ascension64]

So when are we seeing UB for Tutu... next week is it?

 

Yeah I know UB-BG1 still had outstanding bugs in the non-Tutu version last I checked. But someone pointed out a Tutu conversion would accelerate the bugfixing process since few people play the original BG1 still or would want to modify their BG1 installations.

Very eager, I see. Again, I'm not in charge of the project, so I'll have to direct you to SimDing0. He would know best the course of action to take. I can say that BG1-UB v3 has been converted to Tutu using PCU and sent to Sim, and it doesn't install. I think I explained previously the problems with missing Tutu resources, but otherwise that's it.