|
I'm simply giving my view on the situation, based on the information available. I have not seen the current Aardwolf code, so I cannot tell you how it has been developed, but for the vast majority of muds the changes are simply tacked on (the "ball of mud" approach to development). In such a case, you end up with one big messy chunk of Diku derived code, which cannot then simply be moved to another socket layer and claimed as original.
Now, it is possible to develop a mud in a modular fashion whereby the changes based on scratch-written modules could be shifted across to the new code base. However when you start with a Diku derivative, the majority of your changes aren't going to be like that. And when moving any non-derived stuff you do have, you're certainly unlikely to retain enough of the original to end up with a result that "looks a lot like" the original Diku derivative, unless you've very specifically gone out of your way to create something with the same look-and-feel.
I'm not making any statements about guilt or innocence, as I've not seen the Aardwolf code, nor (to my knowledge) have they even transferred any of the old mud over to the new codebase yet. I am simply pointing out the possible scenarios.
Yes. But my remark was in response to your statement "Lasher is going to start the mud over completely from scratch, based on bare-bones code that has nothing whatsoever to do with Diku, and with full CVS logs to prove this". And my point was that the logs would not prove anything.
Yes, getting one of the Diku team, or perhaps Russ Taylor, to look over the code would certainly be a good way to clear the situation.
|