11 hours ago, Perifractic said:
We can only be so clear in the FAQ before we start sounding like we are over explaining things. I had assumed that the fact that the android and iOS versions are linked directly from the official downloads button on this very same website would be enough indication that we endorse those and actually worked with the developers.
What is frowned upon is creating physical machines running our licensed code.
Understood on the final part, but "bare metal pi" is just as much an emulation platform as Windows, Linux, etc, yet it was frowned upon. BMC64, for example, it just a port / fork of vice to run on a raspberry pi but without needing a stand alone operating system. One could do the same thing for a PC compatible, and run an emulator without a general purpose OS. There still wouldn't be physical hardware, and it would still have all the same limitations as an emulator, it just wouldn't require Windows or Linux.
As for having links to Android & iOS, I hadn't noticed those previously, probably because you can't (for various degrees of "can't") download them directly, you have to go through their stores. I had noticed the Arch Linux port previously, but in our discussion at the time I was told (paraphrased) "if it doesn't come from the official team it shouldn't be talked about".
Now that I see there are some okay to discuss "unofficial ports" it only makes me question more where the line is between "this is okay, that is not". That's why a slightly more detailed FAQ might prove useful, but I also agree with the POV that one cannot document every little detail, there will always be more "but what if" questions. Hence why, other than a couple of warnings to people, I choose just not to discuss anything related to ports not provided by the project, because I can't see a "bright line" that makes some emulators okay but other emulators not okay.
In any case, the point to my post was not to whine (I promise!) it was to genuinely try to be helpful by providing context I have personally experienced.
Note: I draw a bright line between "emulation" (running software that pretends to be one machine while running on another, particularly just compiling open source code and linking against a standard library to provide OS level functionality) and "reconfigurable cores" (such as MiSTer or a reimplementation on some other FPGA platform). The former works the same was as a WIndows / Linux / Mac / iOS / Android port, just using a different standard library. The latter actually is a clone of the platform, just using reconfigurable logic instead of hardcoded logic. I understand completely the rationale for not discussing / attempting the latter.