Tinc Is Not Catan
github.com
github.com
I'm all for a good naming conflict, but no one is mistaking a board game for a networking protocol.
I feel everyone always finds something to complain about a name. Let's examine the *INC name space.
A, E, I, U, X - don't really work
Binc - why did you name it identically to a book foundation?
C, K - you dirty old boy, you!
Dinc - dual income no children, huh?
Finc - how contemptible!
Ginc - taken
Hinc - not bad, although urban dictionary tells me it's Latin slang for lesbian, so some language major or 1600 year old European is going to might raise a red flag here
Jinc - there's a website, it looks important
Linc - this name space is so crowded already!
Minc - just some USDA thing, not too bad
Ninc - another book thing, eh?
Oinc - lol, I kind of like it. Too bad Catan doesn't have bacon.
P, R, S - all crowded
Vinc - actually pretty well open here
Winc - do you want to compete with the Internet's #1 way to wine? Maybe they should join forces? Nah, Catan is more of a beer game.
Yinc - there's stuff here, but not too shabby
Zinc - as you pointed out, it's a thing already, which is the same logic you used against tinc
Point being, naming is hard, and nothing is unique, and it doesn't really help anyone to complain about names unless there's a really valid conflict, like, say, they came out with a new network protocol and named it tync or invented some new miracle element named zink and there's actual room for confusion.
Winsoc Is Not Settlers of Catan.
That way you throwback both to the old name of the game AND the old internet thing, but spelled different.
Eh, maybe I'm salty because I use the everliving heck out of Tinc-the-vpn-thing. :)
Brick Really Isn't Catan, K?
Much easier to just submit to freeboardgames.io or host your own instance.
Oof
I'm only one data point, but when I visit a site and see that, I immediately close it and move on.
With those assumptions in mind, would it be OK from a legal/copyright POV to release such an adaptation to the general public?
PLEASE don't do this. PLEASE.
I get the idea that it would be nice if the web were different, but I think that is a personal responsibility to choose for yourself or try to address yourself by submitting a PR that makes the repo better.
But I understand that ironing out all the issues on all browsers is very resource demanding...
There's no need for the "go use X browser right now" messages unless you're taking advantage of some bleeding edge API that only exists in one place.
To the authors: Personally I wouldn't put too much effort into cross-browser compatibility early on for the sake of satisfying the users of niche software, but ... almost all modern DOM features are available cross-browser/platform these days and it will likely save you a lot of effort further on down the road dealing with deprecated APIs and other headaches to use it as a smoke test for code quality.