Great tutorial, there’s a lot of valuable information here, thanks for sharing it.
I just want to make sure I understand this correctly, especially regarding the disclaimer.
If someone learns from this tutorial and then writes their own independent implementation, is attribution still expected in that case, or only when actual code, very specific implementations, assets, or license-restricted material are reused?
My understanding was that tutorials mainly teach concepts and workflows, and that attribution is usually required when protected content is reused rather than when someone applies the ideas in their own original code.
I just wanted to clarify how you see this. I might be missing some context here, but I’m not sure what “drama” this refers to.
If you learn from something, or for instance, like in a thesis or paper. Obviously, a nod to the documentation, tutorial, info source is appreciated. ( actually, technically in a thesis or paper it's mandatory ).
But of course, at the era of the modern internet, anyone is allowed to be an ass and not mention anything like if they re-invented the wheel themselves ; )
We are in the context of a community, and sharing the information of what was done by who helps spreading resources, knowledge, discovering plugins or content made by the original author, etc... It's an healthy way of keeping the community solid and united.
That "drama" refers tom something that happened a bit prior to the publication of that tutorial which is honestly not relevant... but needed to be clarified at a more "wide" scale, that part:
as an information toward ANY content on the hub, from ANY creator.
More or less if you prefer, this tutorial is not asking anyone to licence their stuffs the same way it is licenced. And no one is gonna "sue" you for making something ND or whatever tight licence you'd choose. On the other hand, as explained in that section, that tutorial is not a pure API documentation, it's a full custom approach to properly handle CUAs. For instance, there are several sections handling UI management or storable registration, or even the gameobject detection, is a whole set of procedure you don't have to think about, it works, it's tested... you won't fall into traps I had to endure with VAM's ecosystem and understand why this or that breaks.
All this is actually a "ready made" code/mini-framework, which comes from time spend understanding the problematics of VAM's plugins and trying to solve them.
Combine this to a tutorial, written and structure to ease the understanding for a newcomer, a code, completely re-arranged and commented to also ease the understanding of the logic behind it... it is time I (or anyone else if we were talking about another resource/tutorial) could have spent elsewhere instead of sharing that information.
Which, I think is worth attributing to the author.
If you look at my code, you will find credits in the releases but you will find also, things spread all around the source with the VAM's original author or even URLs and names from Reddit/Unity/Unreal Engine forums who gave precious tips and tricks to do random things.
I honestly find absolutely normal to give credits where it's due, especially if it saved me time and headhaches... no matter how simple the code excerpt of code was.
I think that's all ^^
That said I have a question for you, since I had several PM about that from other people.
May I ask you why it's a problem to credit people in the release and the source code when it helped you understanding something?
'coz I have a hard time understanding why so much people find that an issue.
PLEASE:
