It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussionWhy isn't Galaxy open source?(83 posts)(83 posts)
(83 posts)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
This is my favourite topic
Posted April 22, 2019
I'd almost suggest that it has to do with a sense of pride more than anything else.

Even making the components to Galaxy would help a lot. Most of the clients use open source parts at some point.
Posted April 22, 2019
Sorry for my late reply but let me clear up why I've been wondering about this.

Steam / Origin / ... are all closed source because they want to control the client side, they don't want people to be able to strip their DRM / tracking / ... out of their client.

GOG is a more open platform where they present Galaxy as optional, therefore I don't see the problem with people forking Galaxy, since it is just a front end for installing games. They don't need to control Galaxy since it doesn't make them any money from tracking their users (I hope.)


avatar
bram1253: I have been pondering this question during the evening and I can't find a reason why this shouldn't be the case, therefore I'd love to know your thoughts on the matter.
avatar
Cambrey: Newbie question: what would one do with an open source Galaxy? Just curious...
It would allow programmers to make changes to Galaxy as they see fit. They could, for example, add custom themes, improve speed, port Galaxy to different platforms, add more options like being able to download all your games as a backup, ...
Post edited April 22, 2019 by bram1253
Posted April 22, 2019
avatar
Retroman88: Well my question to you is why you think it should be...dont get me wrong I love the principles of open source but I am also a realist.

I would think having public access to the source code of a Galaxy would be a very bad idea. It would be completely open to abuse and would likely have a huge impact to the security of gog.

No other store front (Steam, Origin, Uplay, Epic etc.) is open source and I think for very good reason.
If they would have something in there that could impact the security of GOG then they shouldn't have it in there in the first place. Using a disassembler like radare2 / IDA Pro / ... you'd be able to find all security loopholes with enough time in a binary. Open source isn't really meant to improve security but it does improve security as an indirect result.
Posted April 22, 2019
avatar
bram1253: I have been pondering this question during the evening and I can't find a reason why this shouldn't be the case, therefore I'd love to know your thoughts on the matter.
Because building it was an investment. Keeping it proprietary protects their investment. In other words, it's the same reason any other company does the same.

I generally support open source efforts, but I also think that businesses should be allowed to protect their proprietary information.
Posted April 22, 2019
avatar
bram1253: I have been pondering this question during the evening and I can't find a reason why this shouldn't be the case, therefore I'd love to know your thoughts on the matter.
avatar
firstpastthepost: Because building it was an investment. Keeping it proprietary protects their investment. In other words, it's the same reason any other company does the same.

I generally support open source efforts, but I also think that businesses should be allowed to protect their proprietary information.
Of course but I don't see the point in protecting it since Galaxy is purely optional and Galaxy itself isn't generating them additional income as far as I'm aware.
Posted April 22, 2019
avatar
bram1253: Of course but I don't see the point in protecting it since Galaxy is purely optional and Galaxy itself isn't generating them additional income as far as I'm aware.
The fact that it's optional doesn't negate the fact that they invested in the software, and they fact that it doesn't directly make money doesn't either.

They built a client to compete with other storefronts who have clients and likely don't want to make their source code available to said competition. Making it open source doesn't really add any value to their investment and may run counter to planned future development. Open source isn't always the best option for everything, it depends on what their plans are for the client.
Posted April 22, 2019
avatar
bram1253: Of course but I don't see the point in protecting it since Galaxy is purely optional and Galaxy itself isn't generating them additional income as far as I'm aware.
avatar
firstpastthepost: The fact that it's optional doesn't negate the fact that they invested in the software, and they fact that it doesn't directly make money doesn't either.

They built a client to compete with other storefronts who have clients and likely don't want to make their source code available to said competition. Making it open source doesn't really add any value to their investment and may run counter to planned future development. Open source isn't always the best option for everything, it depends on what their plans are for the client.
It would allow for community members to contribute, like porting Galaxy to Linux, which still hasn't been done.
Posted April 22, 2019
avatar
firstpastthepost: The fact that it's optional doesn't negate the fact that they invested in the software, and they fact that it doesn't directly make money doesn't either.

They built a client to compete with other storefronts who have clients and likely don't want to make their source code available to said competition. Making it open source doesn't really add any value to their investment and may run counter to planned future development. Open source isn't always the best option for everything, it depends on what their plans are for the client.
avatar
bram1253: It would allow for community members to contribute, like porting Galaxy to Linux, which still hasn't been done.
it would be a nightmare if they got people running galaxy on platforms not supported , because the game license they get is probably meant to run on particular os only.

imagine if galaxy was running on ps4 unofficially and people could play games like diablo , Sony and blizzard would certainly take action .
Posted April 22, 2019
avatar
liquidsnakehpks: it would be a nightmare if they got people running galaxy on platforms not supported , because the game license they get is probably meant to run on particular os only.

imagine if galaxy was running on ps4 unofficially and people could play games like diablo , Sony and blizzard would certainly take action .
That's completely nonsensical, since having Galaxy ported to any given system doesn't mean the games would somehow magically work. Galaxy runs on the Mac, but that doesn't make Windows-only games run.
Posted April 22, 2019
avatar
bram1253: It would allow for community members to contribute, like porting Galaxy to Linux, which still hasn't been done.
avatar
liquidsnakehpks: it would be a nightmare if they got people running galaxy on platforms not supported , because the game license they get is probably meant to run on particular os only.

imagine if galaxy was running on ps4 unofficially and people could play games like diablo , Sony and blizzard would certainly take action .
People can still make their own GOG clients from scratch, making Galaxy open source would simply make it easier for people to make changes.
Posted April 23, 2019
The Desura game store's gaming client is open source. They went out of business.
Posted April 23, 2019
avatar
skeletonbow: The Desura game store's gaming client is open source. They went out of business.
not true.
technically they went into adminsitration (2nd time?) then goit bought out and another company bought them up and never did much else with it.

it would be more accurate to state "desura stopped doing business"
Posted April 23, 2019
avatar
bram1253: GOG is a more open platform where they present Galaxy as optional.
avatar
Cambrey:
avatar
bram1253:
Not sure that is how being open source would work lol.







but I like.
Posted April 23, 2019
high rated
itch.io's client is opensource https://github.com/itchio/itch and has an open api https://itch.io/docs/api/overview

Frankly if itch.io was a dedicated DRM-free site it would be my preferred place to get games that said I'm wary of it fearing that devs might withdraw the DRM-free installer or fail to update it without recourse for me.

For those wonder how open-source benefits GOG think about a bug in Galaxy closed source the dev receives bug reports likely has to go back and forth to get the data to pinpoint it particularly if its not easily reproducible I mean how many folks are willing to install a debug build of Galaxy at request does GOG even ask that or do unreproducible/hard to find bugs just get ignored? With open source perhaps a bug report they get tell them which line of code is the problem perhaps it is a pull request or patch that fixes the problem. Now that might not happen often but each time it does it reduces the cost of maintaining the software. Those are benefits that come from simply making the source code available even if they don't allow pull requests for features or the like.

Given how the site tends to do all kinds of weird things I'm guessing the answer for why its closed source is cause its a mess with hacky things all over the place.
Post edited April 23, 2019 by Cusith
Posted April 23, 2019
avatar
skeletonbow: The Desura game store's gaming client is open source. They went out of business.
Those things aren't in correlation.
avatar
Cusith: itch.io's client is opensource https://github.com/itchio/itch and has an open api https://itch.io/docs/api/overview

Frankly if itch.io was a dedicated DRM-free site it would be my preferred place to get games that said I'm wary of it fearing that devs might withdraw the DRM-free installer or fail to update it without recourse for me.

For those wonder how open-source benefits GOG think about a bug in Galaxy closed source the dev receives bug reports likely has to go back and forth to get the data to pinpoint it particularly if its not easily reproducible I mean how many folks are willing to install a debug build of Galaxy at request does GOG even ask that or do unreproducible/hard to find bugs just get ignored? With open source perhaps a bug report they get tell them which line of code is the problem perhaps it is a pull request or patch that fixes the problem. Now that might not happen often but each time it does it reduces the cost of maintaining the software. Those are benefits that come from simply making the source code available even if they don't allow pull requests for features or the like.

Given how the site tends to do all kinds of weird things I'm guessing the answer for why its closed source is cause its a mess with hacky things all over the place.
If hacky code becomes open source, developers will be able to make the code a lot cleaner.
Post edited April 23, 2019 by bram1253
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussionWhy isn't Galaxy open source?(83 posts)(83 posts)
(83 posts)