Fix compiling instructions for macOS & crash when play once is selected in timeline

[joyel24]

Noothing to say, check file diff...
The actual macos compiling instructions only works for a specific sdk version. I fixed that very easily.

I did not expect but I also fixed the crash bug when play once is selected #458 in timeline thanks to aseprite/aseprite@aa8cf94 .

[joyel24]

@maujin111 @Calinou @felipemanga ?

[felipemanga]

Sorry, I haven't had a chance to properly look into this yet. The crash fix is particularly tricky: we must not look at any changes that were done to Aseprite after the fork due to the different licenses involved, so we should try to find an alternative way to fix the problem.

[joyel24]

@felipemanga Thanks for your reply, I'm not very familiar with licences, all I know is it's annoying a lot of people !
What if we change some variables names, something like that ?

[felipemanga]

Changing variable names might actually make things worse: it indicates that you were trying to hide something you knew you weren't supposed to do. 😅

[zlago]

What if we change some variables names, something like that ?

youre still copying the code, and so must comply with the license. GPL-like licenses are somewhat nasty in the best way to comply with the license, if you cannot comply with the license, is to not even look at the code, as you cannot break the terms the code is licensed under if you dont know the code at all.

[joyel24]

Ok, so I think I'm gonna delete the build releases from my repo and keep my out of law libresprite copy for myself.
You can close this PR if you want but it's sad...

@dacap Can you tell us your opinion about the little 5 lines of code I stole you, are you gonna send me DMCA claims like these assholes from Take Two do ?

[felipemanga]

• Could've done without the final edits there.
• In the same way we want our GPL license to be respected, we should respect others'.
• Even if these 5 lines of code are deemed trivial, we really want to avoid having the precedent and risk making a habit of copying (or even looking at) any code with an incompatible license. It's an abundance of caution since the current maintainers have a hobby of coding but not of dealing with the consequences of copyright infringement.

[joyel24]

Of course I understand all of that. This is just that in my opinion, starting a project with a permissive open source license and using a part of code made by the community then changing license while the project is used by a lot of people to forbid other people using the code anymore, even code that aren't made by authors is a bit hypocrite and selfish.
I just don't like at all this kind of philosophy, like some multinationals are doing for example.

I don't want to disturb this fork and I understand that it will never be merged and that's alright.
But I really wanted to have @dacap answer about this specific 5 lines of code and what he think about it... He may be permissive for such a little thing for exemple, I don't think it's impossible.

[dacap]

@joyel24 you can use the patch, but I don't want this to become a common practice, so this will be the first and last time (so I can refer to this comment in the future if a similar situation appears).

I'd recommend to use the patch as it is (cherry picking it) with a minor edit at the bottom clarifying that the patch is licensed (as an alternative to the Aseprite EULA) under GPL and linking to this comment 👍

[joyel24]

@dacap
Very nice, thank you.

I'll make the changes you're suggesting if maintainers of this fork are ok to merge this useful patch.

@felipemanga
Do you agree with it ? If you're ok, I'll make some changes suggested by dacap but i'll not make useless effort if you don't... So waiting for your green light.

If needed, I also can split this PR bacause it's fixing 2 different things without being linked.

[felipemanga]

@joyel24 Since permission has been given, then sure.

@dacap Thank you for allowing it and for the clarification. 👍

[joyel24]

@felipemanga Perfect, I made the changes suggested by decap, check that but I think it's ready to merge 👍

[dacap]

I think my comment was misunderstood, but you should cherry pick the original commit (keeping myself as the author), and editing the commit description talking about the license options+link to my comment. Thanks.

[joyel24]

I think my comment was misunderstood, but you should cherry pick the original commit (keeping myself as the author), and editing the commit description talking about the license options+link to my comment. Thanks.

Oh right, I didn't well understood your meaning of cherry picking... But I don't really know how I can do it. Never did it before. I'll try again later if it's really important for you.