Why are more than one version of some programs allowed on th

[Graham Banks]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Graham Banks at 27 June 2000 12:53:27:
I don't believe that more than one version of any program should be allowed on the rating list (eg, Gromit2, GnuChess4 and others). If you were to be consistent in allowing this, then theoretically you should have every version of others such as Crafty, Little Goliath, etc.
What do others think?
Graham.

[Mogens Larsen]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Mogens Larsen at 27 June 2000 13:54:33:
Als Antwort auf: / As an answer to: Why are more than one version of some programs allowed on the rating list? geschrieben von: / posted by: Graham Banks at 27 June 2000 12:53:27:

I don't believe that more than one version of any program should be allowed on the rating list (eg, Gromit2, GnuChess4 and others). If you were to be consistent in allowing this, then theoretically you should have every version of others such as Crafty, Little Goliath, etc.
What do others think?

This issue was raised a while back. I believe that both versions of GnuChess should be allowed, because different authors are involved and apparently they only have the name GnuChess in common.
I'm not too fond of allowing Gromit 2 though, since Frank Schneider is involved in both Gromit projects. However, their playing style is different, so including it or not is up to Dann Corbit. He wants to include it, so that's the way it is, even though I disagree.
Multiple versions of Crafty or Little Goliath are not comparable to the examples of Gromit and GnuChess. Clones are presumably not allowed either, so Bionic is also out.
Best wishes...
Mogens

[Pete Galati]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Pete Galati at 27 June 2000 18:31:21:
Als Antwort auf: / As an answer to: Re: Why are more than one version of some programs allowed on the rating list? geschrieben von: / posted by: Mogens Larsen at 27 June 2000 13:54:33:

I don't believe that more than one version of any program should be allowed on the rating list (eg, Gromit2, GnuChess4 and others). If you were to be consistent in allowing this, then theoretically you should have every version of others such as Crafty, Little Goliath, etc.
What do others think?

This issue was raised a while back. I believe that both versions of GnuChess should be allowed, because different authors are involved and apparently they only have the name GnuChess in common.
I'm not too fond of allowing Gromit 2 though, since Frank Schneider is involved in both Gromit projects. However, their playing style is different, so including it or not is up to Dann Corbit. He wants to include it, so that's the way it is, even though I disagree.
Multiple versions of Crafty or Little Goliath are not comparable to the examples of Gromit and GnuChess. Clones are presumably not allowed either, so Bionic is also out.
Best wishes...
Mogens

The thing is that although Frank Schneider was responsible for both programs, they are 2 distinctly different programs. See some of Rémi Coulom notes about that at CCC in the thread "Re: (OT) Books on C++ -" http://site2936.dellhost.com/forums/1/m ... tml?116691
Since they are 2 distinctly different programs, I think that it's the same situation as the 2 different versions of GNUchess. The confusion comes from the fact that they were not given new names.
But they're as different as for example the 1964 Ford Mustang compared to the 2000 Ford Mustang. The biggest similarities being the name, and they both used a unibody chassis, but that's about all they share.
Pete


Rémi Coulom's CCC post

[pavel]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: pavel at 27 June 2000 18:33:51:
Als Antwort auf: / As an answer to: Re: Why are more than one version of some programs allowed on the rating list? geschrieben von: / posted by: Pete Galati at 27 June 2000 18:31:21:

I don't believe that more than one version of any program should be allowed on the rating list (eg, Gromit2, GnuChess4 and others). If you were to be consistent in allowing this, then theoretically you should have every version of others such as Crafty, Little Goliath, etc.
What do others think?

This issue was raised a while back. I believe that both versions of GnuChess should be allowed, because different authors are involved and apparently they only have the name GnuChess in common.
I'm not too fond of allowing Gromit 2 though, since Frank Schneider is involved in both Gromit projects. However, their playing style is different, so including it or not is up to Dann Corbit. He wants to include it, so that's the way it is, even though I disagree.
Multiple versions of Crafty or Little Goliath are not comparable to the examples of Gromit and GnuChess. Clones are presumably not allowed either, so Bionic is also out.
Best wishes...
Mogens

The thing is that although Frank Schneider was responsible for both programs, they are 2 distinctly different programs. See some of Rémi Coulom notes about that at CCC in the thread "Re: (OT) Books on C++ -" http://site2936.dellhost.com/forums/1/m ... tml?116691
Since they are 2 distinctly different programs, I think that it's the same situation as the 2 different versions of GNUchess. The confusion comes from the fact that they were not given new names.
But they're as different as for example the 1964 Ford Mustang compared to the 2000 Ford Mustang. The biggest similarities being the name, and they both used a unibody chassis, but that's about all they share.
Pete

[Mogens Larsen]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Mogens Larsen at 27 June 2000 18:51:07:
Als Antwort auf: / As an answer to: Re: Why are more than one version of some programs allowed on the rating list? geschrieben von: / posted by: Pete Galati at 27 June 2000 18:31:21:

Since they are 2 distinctly different programs, I think that it's the same situation as the 2 different versions of GNUchess. The confusion comes from the fact that they were not given new names.
But they're as different as for example the 1964 Ford Mustang compared to the 2000 Ford Mustang. The biggest similarities being the name, and they both used a unibody chassis, but that's about all they share.

Names don't mean anything when it's the same author.
I don't doubt that at all, but I think there are two points to be made:
1) Is it okay for an author to participate with two programs?
2) How do you define the necessary difference between programs by the same author to warrant its inclusion?
I don't think any author should be allowed to participate with two programs, because it is clearly unfair to the other contestants. The second question is a little more complicated. What constitutes a rewrite? I really dislike accepting such a rubber paragraph in a competition. Is it possible to find two versions of Crafty, Comet, AnMon or you name it, that has that particular quality of being suffiently dissimilar to be accepted. I don't know if there is.
There's only one and sufficient reason to allow Gromit 2.20. That reason is Dann Corbit. As organizer it is his choice and his choice alone whether he wants to include it. He does.
Best wishes...
Mogens

[The arbitrary and caprici]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: The arbitrary and capricious: Dann Corbit at 27 June 2000 19:38:57:
Als Antwort auf: / As an answer to: Re: Why are more than one version of some programs allowed on the rating list? geschrieben von: / posted by: Mogens Larsen at 27 June 2000 18:51:07:

Since they are 2 distinctly different programs, I think that it's the same situation as the 2 different versions of GNUchess. The confusion comes from the fact that they were not given new names.
But they're as different as for example the 1964 Ford Mustang compared to the 2000 Ford Mustang. The biggest similarities being the name, and they both used a unibody chassis, but that's about all they share.

Names don't mean anything when it's the same author.
I don't doubt that at all, but I think there are two points to be made:
1) Is it okay for an author to participate with two programs?
2) How do you define the necessary difference between programs by the same author to warrant its inclusion?
I don't think any author should be allowed to participate with two programs, because it is clearly unfair to the other contestants. The second question is a little more complicated. What constitutes a rewrite? I really dislike accepting such a rubber paragraph in a competition. Is it possible to find two versions of Crafty, Comet, AnMon or you name it, that has that particular quality of being suffiently dissimilar to be accepted. I don't know if there is.
There's only one and sufficient reason to allow Gromit 2.20. That reason is Dann Corbit. As organizer it is his choice and his choice alone whether he wants to include it. He does.

The opinion both of the engine authors and this forum was about evenly divided as to whether it should be included or not.
Since I like to watch it play, it got added.


my ftp site

[Pete Galati]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Pete Galati at 27 June 2000 19:48:32:
Als Antwort auf: / As an answer to: Re: Why are more than one version of some programs allowed on the rating list? geschrieben von: / posted by: Mogens Larsen at 27 June 2000 18:51:07:

Since they are 2 distinctly different programs, I think that it's the same situation as the 2 different versions of GNUchess. The confusion comes from the fact that they were not given new names.
But they're as different as for example the 1964 Ford Mustang compared to the 2000 Ford Mustang. The biggest similarities being the name, and they both used a unibody chassis, but that's about all they share.

Names don't mean anything when it's the same author.
I don't doubt that at all, but I think there are two points to be made:
1) Is it okay for an author to participate with two programs?
2) How do you define the necessary difference between programs by the same author to warrant its inclusion?
I don't think any author should be allowed to participate with two programs, because it is clearly unfair to the other contestants. The second question is a little more complicated. What constitutes a rewrite?
I really dislike accepting such a rubber paragraph in a competition. Is it possible to find two versions of Crafty, Comet, AnMon or you name it, that has that particular quality of being suffiently dissimilar to be accepted. I don't know if there is.
There's only one and sufficient reason to allow Gromit 2.20. That reason is Dann Corbit. As organizer it is his choice and his choice alone whether he wants to include it. He does.
Best wishes...
Mogens

The old program is no longer being developed, so I don't see any deparate need for including it. But the same could be said for GNUchess. I think the whole contest is more of an interest in how strong the programs are relative to each other, not really much of anything else.
As far as I know, Gromit is not a rewrite, it's a different program. Maybe Frank Schneider could shed some light on that subject.
In those cases, we're not talking about new programs. The Crafty & Comet being used today, evolved from the same early Crafty & Comet. As far as I know, that's not the case at all with Gromit. I don't think the new Gromit evolved from the old Gromit
If it were put to a vote, personally, I'd vote to include both Gromits, both GNUs too. But I don't tend to vote for the most popular choices in Frank's News Ticker polls, so...
Pete

[Mogens Larsen]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Mogens Larsen at 27 June 2000 20:24:51:
Als Antwort auf: / As an answer to: Re: Why are more than one version of some programs allowed on the rating list? geschrieben von: / posted by: Pete Galati at 27 June 2000 19:48:32:

The old program is no longer being developed, so I don't see any deparate need for including it. But the same could be said for GNUchess. I think the whole contest is more of an interest in how strong the programs are relative to each other, not really much of anything else.
As far as I know, Gromit is not a rewrite, it's a different program. Maybe Frank Schneider could shed some light on that subject.
In those cases, we're not talking about new programs. The Crafty & Comet being used today, evolved from the same early Crafty & Comet.

You can't compare Gromit with GNUChess. They have nothing in common regarding legitimacy for participation.
One author, one program must still be the rule of thumb. Unless rummaging through source code sounds like fun.
Do you know how all programs have developed through time? What about the WinBoard compatible program Trynyty v1.0 by WYx? If WYx should claim that Crux is a complete rewrite or new program then it must be eligible.
Best wishes...
Mogens

[pete]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: pete at 27 June 2000 21:03:25:
Als Antwort auf: / As an answer to: Re: Why are more than one version of some programs allowed on the rating list? geschrieben von: / posted by: Mogens Larsen at 27 June 2000 20:24:51:

The old program is no longer being developed, so I don't see any deparate need for including it. But the same could be said for GNUchess. I think the whole contest is more of an interest in how strong the programs are relative to each other, not really much of anything else.
As far as I know, Gromit is not a rewrite, it's a different program. Maybe Frank Schneider could shed some light on that subject.
In those cases, we're not talking about new programs. The Crafty & Comet being used today, evolved from the same early Crafty & Comet.

You can't compare Gromit with GNUChess. They have nothing in common regarding legitimacy for participation.
One author, one program must still be the rule of thumb. Unless rummaging through source code sounds like fun.
Do you know how all programs have developed through time? What about the WinBoard compatible program Trynyty v1.0 by WYx? If WYx should claim that Crux is a complete rewrite or new program then it must be eligible.
Best wishes...
Mogens

Just wanted to mention ( as it seems to be forgotten while the musings go on ) that a quite crucial part of Gromit 3 wasn't written by Frank Schneider this time : the eval , it was posted in CCC to be written by Kai Skibbe .
So even if probably Frank still is the "main master" of Gromit , it just isn't the same anymore at all .
Best wishes to you too
pete

[Mogens Larsen]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Mogens Larsen at 27 June 2000 22:06:07:
Als Antwort auf: / As an answer to: Re: Why are more than one version of some programs allowed on the rating list? geschrieben von: / posted by: pete at 27 June 2000 21:03:25:

Just wanted to mention ( as it seems to be forgotten while the musings go on ) that a quite crucial part of Gromit 3 wasn't written by Frank Schneider this time : the eval , it was posted in CCC to be written by Kai Skibbe .
So even if probably Frank still is the "main master" of Gromit , it just isn't the same anymore at all .

No, it wasn't forgotten, it just doesn't matter. Frank Schneider is still the author of two participating programs. The decision has been made by Dann to include it, so no point in discussing it further.
Best wishes...
Mogens

[Pete Galati]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Pete Galati at 27 June 2000 22:35:09:
Als Antwort auf: / As an answer to: Re: Why are more than one version of some programs allowed on the rating list? geschrieben von: / posted by: Mogens Larsen at 27 June 2000 22:06:07:

Just wanted to mention ( as it seems to be forgotten while the musings go on ) that a quite crucial part of Gromit 3 wasn't written by Frank Schneider this time : the eval , it was posted in CCC to be written by Kai Skibbe .
So even if probably Frank still is the "main master" of Gromit , it just isn't the same anymore at all .

No, it wasn't forgotten, it just doesn't matter. Frank Schneider is still the author of two participating programs. The decision has been made by Dann to include it, so no point in discussing it further.
Best wishes...
Mogens

I have never been under the impression that this was a contest between authors.
Pete

[Mogens Larsen]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Mogens Larsen at 27 June 2000 23:09:46:
Als Antwort auf: / As an answer to: Re: Why are more than one version of some programs allowed on the rating list? geschrieben von: / posted by: Pete Galati at 27 June 2000 22:35:09:

I have never been under the impression that this was a contest between authors.
Pete

You can't separate the two, so indirectly it is a contest between authors. If you want sport lingo instead: The Frank Schneider team is using an extra man on the pitch ).
Best wishes...
Mogens

[Pete Galati]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Pete Galati at 27 June 2000 23:35:40:
Als Antwort auf: / As an answer to: Re: Why are more than one version of some programs allowed on the rating list? geschrieben von: / posted by: Mogens Larsen at 27 June 2000 23:09:46:

I have never been under the impression that this was a contest between authors.
Pete

You can't separate the two, so indirectly it is a contest between authors. If you want sport lingo instead: The Frank Schneider team is using an extra man on the pitch ).
Best wishes...
Mogens

I don't care for baseball. Could I have that in boxing lingo?
Pete

[What's in a name? Who wou]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: What's in a name? Who would name their son 'then'? : Dann Corbit at 28 June 2000 00:03:12:
Als Antwort auf: / As an answer to: Re: Why are more than one version of some programs allowed on the rating list? geschrieben von: / posted by: Mogens Larsen at 27 June 2000 23:09:46:

I have never been under the impression that this was a contest between authors.
Pete

You can't separate the two, so indirectly it is a contest between authors. If you want sport lingo instead: The Frank Schneider team is using an extra man on the pitch ).

The contest is between the engines in Volker's Crown list that don't puke so badly it's useless to try to run them.
Given that list, I removed the engines which are not only obvious clones, but (intially) pretended that they were original.
I don't have a problem with clones (in fact, probably all of the programs are at least partial clones of other programs). But I don't like those for which the author pretended to be completely original and hid the true origin of the program.
I wish that people would not become offended over this contest. It's just a game, after all.



my ftp site