Laigter! Automatic Normal Map generator for 2D games!!

azagayaazagaya Posts: 10Member
edited April 29 in Resources

Hey, i'm developing a free software for generating normal maps for 2D games. It's available in english or spanish (it auto detects your pc language). You can get it here! If you try it, please tell me what you think!


Tags :

Comments

  • TwistedTwiglegTwistedTwigleg Posts: 1,152Admin

    I've tried Laigter awhile ago and it is really neat! It worked great and the results are very nice.

    I'm especially impressed with the tile support, as that is something I find missing from most normal map creation tools. I also like that it can also use a height map for the generation process.

    All in all, it is quite impressive and I think it could be very useful if you need normal maps.
    Thanks for sharing @azagaya!

  • azagayaazagaya Posts: 10Member

    Thank you for the possitive comments! They mean a lot to me. I worked hard to make this soft, so is great to know it's useful for others!!

  • CalinouCalinou Posts: 233Admin Godot Developer
    edited May 5

    Looks good :)

    Are there plans to release the source code under an open source license? This way, the community could help improve it.

  • azagayaazagaya Posts: 10Member
    edited May 8

    Calinou,
    I've been thinking about that. Making it open source could let more experienced programmers help a lot, and let me learn from them (although i fear a bit what others can say about my coding).

    However, i know little about licensing... what open source license would you recommend? I use some LGPL libraries.

    I originally made Laigter for myself, but then i thought it could be useful for others. As i don't get any revenue from it, making it open source wouldn't really harm me. Indeed it surely will benefit me.

  • CalinouCalinou Posts: 233Admin Godot Developer
    edited May 10

    However, i know little about licensing... what open source license would you recommend? I use some LGPL libraries.

    The Choose a License website gives out a few recommendations :)

  • azagayaazagaya Posts: 10Member

    Thanks! I tempted to chose MIT license, but i don't know if i can use lgpl libraries with MIT. I'll investigate further.

  • MegalomaniakMegalomaniak Posts: 1,172Admin
    edited May 11

    How are you using the LGPL licensed libraries? AFAIK dynamic linking is not an issue(assuming you aren't distributing the library with your application) but static would trigger the licenses virality. Thus your project would inherit the LGPL automatically.

    edit: According to the following answer on stackexchange even static linking is fine so long as you supply the object files to enable compiling with a different version of the LGPL library:
    https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/a/312759

  • azagayaazagaya Posts: 10Member

    Hi,
    I use dynamic linking, an I distribute the compiled libraries with my binary. I thought that was allowed! I should also then distribute the source code of those libraries? I'm using Qt lgpl libraries. Also I'm using opencv with BSD, but I'm also distributing a copy of that license so I think that's ok.

    So, i'm able to use MIT license if i use dynamic linking for LGPL libraries if I also distribute their code? Is that right?

  • MegalomaniakMegalomaniak Posts: 1,172Admin

    My interpretation is that you need to make sure not to distribute the libraries, rather have the user install them system wide as a dependency. But I could be wrong.

  • azagayaazagaya Posts: 10Member

    Ok thanks, Or I could just use LGPL license.

  • MegalomaniakMegalomaniak Posts: 1,172Admin
    edited May 11

    OK, so further clarification can be found here:
    https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html#LGPLStaticVsDynamic

    For the purpose of complying with the LGPL (any extant version: v2, v2.1 or v3):

    (1) If you statically link against an LGPLed library, you must also provide your application in an object (not necessarily source) format, so that a user has the opportunity to modify the library and relink the application.

    (2) If you dynamically link against an LGPLed library already present on the user's computer, you need not convey the library's source. On the other hand, if you yourself convey the executable LGPLed library along with your application, whether linked with statically or dynamically, you must also convey the library's sources, in one of the ways for which the LGPL provides.


    @azagaya said:
    Ok thanks, Or I could just use LGPL license.

    As long as you aren't distributing/conveying any code under incompatible license(s), yes, you certainly could. :)

  • azagayaazagaya Posts: 10Member

    Ok thanks a lot! I really appreciate your help!
    I found in the QT forum this:

    And under LGPL:
    you have to provide source code of Qt, to all your clients who ask for it (for free)
    you have to inform your users that you are using Qt under LGPL + provide license text
    you have to make it possible for your users to swap Qt version (replace Qt libs with their own version). That usually means that you have to link dynamically to Qt (.so on unix, .dll on windows, etc.)
    you can't distribute on some platforms: iOS, probably Android - that's because they do not allow you to link dynamically
    you have to make available any modifications you do to Qt itself (for example, if you change the source code of QString class) to all your users, under LGPL

  • azagayaazagaya Posts: 10Member

    Well, i think i finally understood the lgpl requirements.. i can use MIT with my project, but if i distribute the lgpl libraries with binary, then i have to make the code of that libraries available, plus instructions on how to changchange those libraries (either dynamic or static linking). I think I can do that easily. Also, I had an idea, please tell me if you think is too crazy. What if I rewrite Laigter in godot? The only lgpl library I'm using is qt, and is just for gui. Perhaps I could use godot and gdnative to rewrite my project, or make a 2.0 version. It would also make it easier for shaders. What do you think?

  • MegalomaniakMegalomaniak Posts: 1,172Admin

    Might be doable alright, but it's also worth considering if that's really worth the effort? I'd probably go simply with the LGPL license myself and just keep using QT, at this point.

  • azagayaazagaya Posts: 10Member

    Ok, thanks for the advice, i think i'll do that.

Sign In or Register to comment.