Toggle sidebar

Seta GX / Sega Saturn Emulator Wii (Test & Compatible List) beta v0.3.1 - Evoca / fadedled

  • Thread starter Thread starter peter8
  • Start date Start date
  • Views Views 25,113
  • Replies Replies 151
  • Likes Likes 12
J-Mirage said:
That's a complete false equivalency. The issue here isn't your past or other work, especially porting cores that didn't exist and on which nobody was actively working; it's the fact that you sniped an active project from a developer who explicitly stated a new release was coming soon. Putting code on GitHub is for open collaboration, not for rushing out a compilation with AI fixes to beat the author to their own release. If you genuinely wanted to contribute without taking credit, you would have submitted a Pull Request directly to Evoca.
Click to expand...

How do you know they are AI code fixes? what up yours?
 
J-Mirage said:
That's a complete false equivalency. The issue here isn't your past or other work, especially porting cores that didn't exist and on which nobody was actively working; it's the fact that you sniped an active project from a developer who explicitly stated a new release was coming soon. Putting code on GitHub is for open collaboration, not for rushing out a compilation with AI fixes to beat the author to their own release. If you genuinely wanted to contribute without taking credit, you would have submitted a Pull Request directly to Evoca.
Click to expand...
I understand what you're saying, but we see things differently. You say I'm stealing the code, but the code is from Kronos and Yabuse. All the Seta GX code is identical to Kronos and Yabuse, and the other part of the code is for it to work on the Wii. So, according to what you're saying, whoever created Seta GX stole the Yabuse and Kronos code. I didn't rush to upload anything; it's been almost a year and a half since the last version came out. And if it weren't made with AI, would it be different? You don't know how many months I've spent day and night making this work without any profit. In the end, very few people appreciate it, and that's the least of it. The important thing here is to share; that's what this page is for. Everyone here knows who the original work is. Without that work, there almost certainly wouldn't be an emulator, just like many others that have been ported to the Wii. There's no bad intention here, just sharing. Besides, it's a fork; that's what they're created for.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: cmyksoda, Doblete, niuus and 3 others
I think we might be getting slightly off topic, by getting off topic. The start of this thread was for testing and compatibility for Seta GX. I am greatly appreciative of @cheloruiz79 work, as anything that furthers compatibility is a step in the right direction. Maybe we should make it's own thread for the fork so we can keep on topic and not let things get viered off? Just a suggestion.
Post automatically merged:

Oh, and I forgot one other suggestion to add on. To make it possible to load ISOs/BIN+CUEs from within subfolders? It sure would help to keep things tidy. If you think you could make it work out 😁
 
Last edited by Sowden,
  • Love
  • Like
Reactions: 0arsoluto2 and cheloruiz79
J-Mirage said:
That's a complete false equivalency. The issue here isn't your past or other work, especially porting cores that didn't exist and on which nobody was actively working; it's the fact that you sniped an active project from a developer who explicitly stated a new release was coming soon. Putting code on GitHub is for open collaboration, not for rushing out a compilation with AI fixes to beat the author to their own release. If you genuinely wanted to contribute without taking credit, you would have submitted a Pull Request directly to Evoca.
Click to expand...

Sounds like you're just talking for other people though. I get you're offended somehow even though it's common practice in the emuscene to compile new builds based on source changes in basically every open source emulator ever to get a "sneak peek" of upcoming features or compatibility. I mean if Evoca really didn't want people to compile builds before an official new Seta GX release then he could just as well make the github private and only publish the code at release similar to Wii64 and WiiSX, but I suspect he doesn't care and you've taken it upon yourself to make a mountain out of a molehill.
 
  • Like
Reactions: niuus and 0arsoluto2
Sowden said:
I think we might be getting slightly off topic, by getting off topic. The start of this thread was for testing and compatibility for Seta GX. I am greatly appreciative of @cheloruiz79 work, as anything that furthers compatibility is a step in the right direction. Maybe we should make it's own thread for the fork so we can keep on topic and not let things get viered off? Just a suggestion.
Click to expand...
Done. Both Seta GX projects deserve their own specific space.
https://gbatemp.net/threads/seta-gx-fork.683400/
 
  • Like
Reactions: 0arsoluto2
cheloruiz79 said:
I understand what you're saying, but we see things differently. You say I'm stealing the code, but the code is from Kronos and Yabuse. All the Seta GX code is identical to Kronos and Yabuse, and the other part of the code is for it to work on the Wii. So, according to what you're saying, whoever created Seta GX stole the Yabuse and Kronos code. I didn't rush to upload anything; it's been almost a year and a half since the last version came out. And if it weren't made with AI, would it be different? You don't know how many months I've spent day and night making this work without any profit. In the end, very few people appreciate it, and that's the least of it. The important thing here is to share; that's what this page is for. Everyone here knows who the original work is. Without that work, there almost certainly wouldn't be an emulator, just like many others that have been ported to the Wii. There's no bad intention here, just sharing. Besides, it's a fork; that's what they're created for.
Click to expand...
I think the issue is a bit more complex than that. I understand that using GitHub stems from the idea of collaborative work and community building. But taking someone else's work and modifying it independently doesn't necessarily reflect that idea of collaboration. Reaching out to the creator and trying to work together might have been a better approach, I don't know if you tried that, but if it had been possible, the project could have grown even more with the support of multiple people.

And @0arsoluto2 I think it's not about "just sit idly by” either, but about making sure things are done in the best way possible. From my perspective, when the only goal becomes getting the emulator to work, there's a risk of overlooking the recognition and effort of those who spent time building it. I also think that when you work on a complex project, understanding how it works and the vision behind it can be just as important as making it functional. I know collaborating with other developers isn't always easy. For example, if the original creator was (or is) completely against using AI, taking a project they spent years on and pushing it in that direction could feel disrespectful to their vision. Just because something is technically possible doesn't mean it aligns with the intention behind the work.

Either way, I think credits are still very important. Nowadays, many people see projects without looking into the context, maybe in this forum everyone knows who the original creator is, but if the project is shared on other platforms like YouTube, just mentioning the emulator's name probably isn't enough. I know constantly clarifying that can feel repetitive or even tedious, but it's also a way to acknowledge the effort of those who made the project possible from the start. At the end of the day, I think we all appreciate having our work recognized, and I'm sure you'd want people to see the time and dedication you've put into any of your projects. So giving that same recognition to those who laid the groundwork is a sign of respect for their work.

I don't think the point here is to decide who's right or to blame anyone. Instead, I see it as an invitation to reflect on how our actions, even when well-intentioned, can have consequences for other people's work and effort that we might not have considered :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 0arsoluto2 and cheloruiz79
learns_land said:
I think the issue is a bit more complex than that. I understand that using GitHub stems from the idea of collaborative work and community building. But taking someone else's work and modifying it independently doesn't necessarily reflect that idea of collaboration. Reaching out to the creator and trying to work together might have been a better approach, I don't know if you tried that, but if it had been possible, the project could have grown even more with the support of multiple people.
Click to expand...

The whole point of the GNU public license which this project is licensed under is that you're free to do whatever you want with the code, as is as long as you publish the changes made. The license itself is the permission to compile and modify the code as you wish. Cheloruiz did that, he's done nothing wrong and is being unfairly besmirched over some kind of unwritten etiquette rules which I haven't seen literally anywhere else in the emuscene outside of some late 1990s dev drama.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 0arsoluto2, cmyksoda, niuus and 1 other person
cheloruiz79 said:
I understand what you're saying, but we see things differently. You say I'm stealing the code, but the code is from Kronos and Yabuse. All the Seta GX code is identical to Kronos and Yabuse, and the other part of the code is for it to work on the Wii. So, according to what you're saying, whoever created Seta GX stole the Yabuse and Kronos code. I didn't rush to upload anything; it's been almost a year and a half since the last version came out. And if it weren't made with AI, would it be different? You don't know how many months I've spent day and night making this work without any profit. In the end, very few people appreciate it, and that's the least of it. The important thing here is to share; that's what this page is for. Everyone here knows who the original work is. Without that work, there almost certainly wouldn't be an emulator, just like many others that have been ported to the Wii. There's no bad intention here, just sharing. Besides, it's a fork; that's what they're created for.
Click to expand...

You are fundamentally misunderstanding (or intentionally conflating) how open-source development and hardware porting actually work.

Evoca using code from YabaSanshiro and Kronos is not "stealing", it is a standard practice that he already openly acknowledged from day one. Both YabaSanshiro and Kronos are forks of the abandoned Yabause project. What makes Seta GX special is that it isn't just a simple clone; it is a heavily optimized port specifically rewritten to utilize the Wii's Hollywood GPU through a hardware accelerated renderer instead of slow software graphics, alongside a custom SH2 dynarec designed to make it run properly on the console's limited resources. That is actual low-level engineering, not piracy.

There is a massive, undeniable difference between adapting an upstream emulator architecture to target a specific console's hardware and what you did: cloning an active, custom-built project, feeding its unreleased dynarec code into an AI to slap some automated fixes on it, and rushing a compiled release just to beat the original author to their own explicitly announced update.

The time since the last official release is completely irrelevant. The moment a developer announces that they are actively working on a new version and will release it soon on GitHub, basic community etiquette dictates that you either wait for their release or contribute via a Pull Request. Rushing a separate fork to bypass the author isn't "sharing in the spirit of open source", it is a text-book definition of opportunistic sniping.

Nobody is undermining the hours you claim to have spent on your past RetroArch cores, but using that past work as a shield to justify breaking etiquette on an active, separate project is a textbook false equivalency. If your true and only intention was simply to share and collaborate without taking credit, you would have submitted your AI modifications directly to Evoca's repository instead of pushing an undocumented fork that just copied his README.

Disorarara said:
Sounds like you're just talking for other people though. I get you're offended somehow even though it's common practice in the emuscene to compile new builds based on source changes in basically every open source emulator ever to get a "sneak peek" of upcoming features or compatibility. I mean if Evoca really didn't want people to compile builds before an official new Seta GX release then he could just as well make the github private and only publish the code at release similar to Wii64 and WiiSX, but I suspect he doesn't care and you've taken it upon yourself to make a mountain out of a molehill.
Click to expand...

You are completely missing the point and confusing two entirely different things.

There is a massive difference between compiling a nightly build straight from an author's commit history to test a preview of upcoming features and what happened here. Compiling source-clean git builds is common practice. Cloning an active repository, injecting external automated AI code into it, and publishing it as a competitive standalone release right before the author's announced update is not "just compiling a build", it is an opportunistic fork that breaks basic scene etiquette.

Furthermore, the argument of "if he didn't want this, he should have made the GitHub private" is the most toxic, anti-open-source mindset imaginable. It shifts the blame onto the developer for being transparent and sharing his progress with the community, rather than holding people accountable for their lack of basic respect. Open source relies on mutual respect and collaboration, not on exploiting openness to frontrun active developers.

Nobody is "making a mountain out of a molehill" here. What I'm pointing out here is that this kind of behavior is exactly what causes talented developers to burn out, give up on the scene, or archive their repositories forever. If you can't see the difference between a clean compilation and an undocumented AI-patched fork designed to beat an active dev to their own release, then you are part of the problem.

Disorarara said:
The whole point of the GNU public license which this project is licensed under is that you're free to do whatever you want with the code, as is as long as you publish the changes made. The license itself is the permission to compile and modify the code as you wish. Cheloruiz did that, he's done nothing wrong and is being unfairly besmirched over some kind of unwritten etiquette rules which I haven't seen literally anywhere else in the emuscene outside of some late 1990s dev drama.
Click to expand...

And here you are fundamentally confusing legal compliance with community etiquette.

Nobody is arguing that he violated the terms of the GNU GPL. Yes, the license legally permits anyone to fork, modify, and redistribute the code. But having the legal right to do something does not make you immune to criticism for being opportunistic, nor does it magically erase the social consequences of your actions. A license governs the code; etiquette governs the community.

Claiming that open-source etiquette doesn't exist outside of "1990s drama" is completely disconnected from the reality of modern development. The core pillar of modern open-source collaboration is the Pull Request workflow. If you identify fixes or want to provide updates, you submit them upstream to the main repository to help the author and keep the project unified. You don't create an undocumented, competitive standalone fork patched with AI code just to frontrun an active developer right before their announced release. That isn't "besmirching" him; it is calling out bad behavior.

When people bypass basic respect and use open-source licenses as a shield to undermine active developers, those developers simply stop sharing their work. You can wave the GPL text around all you want, but if this sort of behavior drives the few actual low-level programmers away from the Wii scene, your precious license won't have any new code left to protect.

learns_land said:
I think the issue is a bit more complex than that. I understand that using GitHub stems from the idea of collaborative work and community building. But taking someone else's work and modifying it independently doesn't necessarily reflect that idea of collaboration. Reaching out to the creator and trying to work together might have been a better approach, I don't know if you tried that, but if it had been possible, the project could have grown even more with the support of multiple people.
Click to expand...

Thank you for actually understanding the nuance of the situation. You hit the nail on the head regarding developer integrity and intention; open source is a social contract built on mutual respect, not just a legal license to frontrun active projects. If the true goal had been collaboration and growth for the Wii scene, this would have been handled through a Pull Request or direct communication with Evoca.
 
  • Like
Reactions: learns_land
J-Mirage said:
You are fundamentally misunderstanding (or intentionally conflating) how open-source development and hardware porting actually work.

Evoca using code from YabaSanshiro and Kronos is not "stealing", it is a standard practice that he already openly acknowledged from day one. Both YabaSanshiro and Kronos are forks of the abandoned Yabause project. What makes Seta GX special is that it isn't just a simple clone; it is a heavily optimized port specifically rewritten to utilize the Wii's Hollywood GPU through a hardware accelerated renderer instead of slow software graphics, alongside a custom SH2 dynarec designed to make it run properly on the console's limited resources. That is actual low-level engineering, not piracy.

There is a massive, undeniable difference between adapting an upstream emulator architecture to target a specific console's hardware and what you did: cloning an active, custom-built project, feeding its unreleased dynarec code into an AI to slap some automated fixes on it, and rushing a compiled release just to beat the original author to their own explicitly announced update.
Click to expand...
What Seta GX actually is is totally irrelevant to this particular discussion and is just you minimizing one contributor's efforts. Sure you didn't say "stealing" you said "sniping" and more or less implied that what he did was stealing, particularly by saying he didn't give credit when he did in fact give credit. You're being disingenuous just because you have a distaste for what he did or how he did it which is unfair and uncalled for.

J-Mirage said:
The time since the last official release is completely irrelevant. The moment a developer announces that they are actively working on a new version and will release it soon on GitHub, basic community etiquette dictates that you either wait for their release or contribute via a Pull Request. Rushing a separate fork to bypass the author isn't "sharing in the spirit of open source", it is a text-book definition of opportunistic sniping.
Click to expand...

Again with this "sniping" accusation, which is a completely absurd etiquette rule that I've never seen mentioned on homebrew discussion until you complained about it. Look at this forum and tell me what you see? Thread after thread of forks of other emulators, many of which are still in development by their original authors. I've not heard one single complaint about all the WiiSX forks, the Wii64 forks, the mGBA forks, the retroarch forks all of which may incorporate code that's still in the repo instead of the last official release. According to you they're all breaking the etiquette by "opportunistically sniping" and yet the only one who's ever complained about it right now is you.

J-Mirage said:
Nobody is undermining the hours you claim to have spent on your past RetroArch cores, but using that past work as a shield to justify breaking etiquette on an active, separate project is a textbook false equivalency. If your true and only intention was simply to share and collaborate without taking credit, you would have submitted your AI modifications directly to Evoca's repository instead of pushing an undocumented fork that just copied his README.

You are completely missing the point and confusing two entirely different things.

There is a massive difference between compiling a nightly build straight from an author's commit history to test a preview of upcoming features and what happened here. Compiling source-clean git builds is common practice. Cloning an active repository, injecting external automated AI code into it, and publishing it as a competitive standalone release right before the author's announced update is not "just compiling a build", it is an opportunistic fork that breaks basic scene etiquette.

Furthermore, the argument of "if he didn't want this, he should have made the GitHub private" is the most toxic, anti-open-source mindset imaginable. It shifts the blame onto the developer for being transparent and sharing his progress with the community, rather than holding people accountable for their lack of basic respect. Open source relies on mutual respect and collaboration, not on exploiting openness to frontrun active developers.
Click to expand...

Again this is etiquette that you've decided on your own, it's not something I've seen in the Wii scene at all. You've made yourself Evoca's spokesperson and decided that he's been slighted which if you ask me is a lot more blatantly disrespectful, especially since you've derailed this thread over this issue. The only toxic, anti-open source mindset is yours by denigrating and besmirching someone else's contribution because you didn't like the way it was done and how it was done. That's for you to get over not for cheloruiz to apologize for, because he did nothing wrong.

J-Mirage said:
Nobody is "making a mountain out of a molehill" here. What I'm pointing out here is that this kind of behavior is exactly what causes talented developers to burn out, give up on the scene, or archive their repositories forever. If you can't see the difference between a clean compilation and an undocumented AI-patched fork designed to beat an active dev to their own release, then you are part of the problem.
Click to expand...
What causes talented developers to burn out is pointless drama like this one. You've not contributed a single line of code and yet here you are denigrating someone who has and further making yourself the advocate for someone who didn't even ask for you to defend them. If Evoca/Fadedled really has an issue with the WIP builds that cheloruiz is doing he has the agency to say so, you don't have to do it for him you just want an excuse to punch down on someone.


J-Mirage said:
And here you are fundamentally confusing legal compliance with community etiquette.

Nobody is arguing that he violated the terms of the GNU GPL. Yes, the license legally permits anyone to fork, modify, and redistribute the code. But having the legal right to do something does not make you immune to criticism for being opportunistic, nor does it magically erase the social consequences of your actions. A license governs the code; etiquette governs the community.

Claiming that open-source etiquette doesn't exist outside of "1990s drama" is completely disconnected from the reality of modern development. The core pillar of modern open-source collaboration is the Pull Request workflow. If you identify fixes or want to provide updates, you submit them upstream to the main repository to help the author and keep the project unified. You don't create an undocumented, competitive standalone fork patched with AI code just to frontrun an active developer right before their announced release. That isn't "besmirching" him; it is calling out bad behavior.
Click to expand...
I have to bring up the GNU GPL because it's not just a legal document it is an etiquette document as well and one that most programmers understand between one another when they choose to use it as their license. Reducing it's importance as just a legal document when we know full this is all homebrew work for fun is basically insulting the original creator of Sega GX by implying he didn't know what he was signing up for when he put this under the GPL.

J-Mirage said:
When people bypass basic respect and use open-source licenses as a shield to undermine active developers, those developers simply stop sharing their work. You can wave the GPL text around all you want, but if this sort of behavior drives the few actual low-level programmers away from the Wii scene, your precious license won't have any new code left to protect.
Click to expand...
That's a very strange statement considering the modern Wii scene is literally built off of forks of forks of forks and yet none of the extremely talented low level programmers like extrems or emu_kidd ever left over it. If anything the only cause of developers leaving is boredom and lack of time, which is exactly why AI is breathing new life into the scene when programmers use it to good effect.

J-Mirage said:
Thank you for actually understanding the nuance of the situation. You hit the nail on the head regarding developer integrity and intention; open source is a social contract built on mutual respect, not just a legal license to frontrun active projects. If the true goal had been collaboration and growth for the Wii scene, this would have been handled through a Pull Request or direct communication with Evoca.
Click to expand...
For all your squawking about communication with Evoca you've shown zero evidence he actually cares this much about this. Maybe take your own advice and ask someone if it bothers them first before you go and destroy their thread with pointless drama.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 0arsoluto2

Site & Scene News

Go to forum More news

Popular threads in this forum

NooDS-Wii

Homebrew  Sonic Generations

Homebrew app Emulator  mGBA-GX - GBA/GBC/GB emulator for Wii

Translation  Luigi's Mansion recompiled has hit the title screen

Homebrew  Music/song origins of Wii homebrew forwarder WADs

ROM Hack  Dragon Quest 25th Anniversary Collection Translation Project

Emulation  New Sharp x68000 Retroarch Wii Core C68K Cyclone Big Edian

Hacking Emulation  Is it possible to install a NDEV Wii System to Dolphin?