Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Feedback on automated name changing process
On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 09:45:06 +0200, Jens Seidel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If I understand correctly you are complaining that after a rename and a minor change to the renamed file users having an older copy of the working copy need to fetch the full file instead of only the delta relative to the old file, right? Yes, though my latest test suggests that even after a rename without a minor change this also is a problem. According to http://svn.collab.net/repos/svn/trunk/CHANGES: Version 1.4.2 dramatically speed up commit of wc-to-wc copy (r21471) Version 1.4.0 also contains numerous working copy improvements by using a new data file format in .svn/ (no XML any more) and using an improved delta algorithm. I strongly suggest to test the new version. (It fixed also at least one major problem I reported :-) I'll take a look at this. I am running the version that comes with Fedora Core 5 right now, which appears to be a pre 1.4 development version. Fedora 7 has 1.4.3 and I'll be switching to that at home soon. In the meantime I can look at building a copy from source, but your comment about meta data format changes suggests there may be some pain in that. ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Preparing for 1.3.2
Okay, looks like all the real blockers are fixed. If everything is alright and noone starts to shout that I should not do so, I will release tomorrow in the afternoon (april 25th, about 17:00 GMT+2/CEST (Central European Summer Time)). So now my tasks for all of you: 1) Send a mail if there are any really important blockers left. 2) Update the changelog. 3) Tell me what to specifically mention in the release notes. That is all for the moment. If everything goes right I will tag in 21 hours. Cheers, Nils Kneuper aka Ivanovic ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Preparing for 1.3.2
On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 08:56:14PM +0200, Nils Kneuper wrote: Okay, looks like all the real blockers are fixed. If everything is alright and noone starts to shout that I should not do so, I will release tomorrow in the afternoon (april 25th, about 17:00 GMT+2/CEST (Central European Summer Time)). So now my tasks for all of you: 1) Send a mail if there are any really important blockers left. Can't think of blockers. 2) Update the changelog. 3) Tell me what to specifically mention in the release notes. That the terrain system is converted and the letters are really fixed now, thus UMC is encouraged to convert their stuff. Since 1.2 letter support will be removed soon all stuff on the campaign server should be at least in 1.3.1 format. The deprected WML messages should be noted since that will raise quite some questions. Also the tools esr made might be nice to mention in the notes. That the terrain toprow has some small terrain glitches which is most noticable that villages are not always shown in the top row. (Hmm maybe it will be a release manual :/ ) Regards, Mark de Wever aka Mordante/SkeletonCrew ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Adding new campaigns to mainline, some guidelines
Okay, what is the status of this? Do we have some guidelines ready so that I can announce this shortly after 1.3.2 (maybe this weekend)? For what exactly should I ask in that announcement? Should I also ask for general maintainers? Or just for campaigns? Would be nice to get some comments... Cheers, Nils Kneuper aka Ivanovic ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Adding new campaigns to mainline, some guidelines
well, apparently the debate part has more or less finished here... the next thing to do would be to synththise that post, and put it either in developer discussion for further comment/looking for a SP maintainer or directly in the campaign forum, locked, as a policy statement... I don't have time to do that, so I would be very gratefull if someone did that for me... On 4/24/07, Nils Kneuper [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Okay, what is the status of this? Do we have some guidelines ready so that I can announce this shortly after 1.3.2 (maybe this weekend)? For what exactly should I ask in that announcement? Should I also ask for general maintainers? Or just for campaigns? Would be nice to get some comments... Cheers, Nils Kneuper aka Ivanovic ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
[Wesnoth-dev] wesnoth and python
Hi all, there seems to be some irritation about the python version that is shipped within the windows package. Here are some facts: 1. Python 2.3 is completely open source without any restrictions. Python 2.4 / 2.5 is compiled with a microsoft runtime dll that needs to be redistributed. Redistribution requires a legal installation of Visual Studio.Net 2003. 2. The legal issues about distributing msvcp71.dll are unclear and no one has truly elaborated on the problem yet. Even lawyers seem to be unsure about the critical issues. However it is commonly agreed that it is very unlikely that microsoft will take action because of license issues here. See these links for further information: http://www.thescripts.com/forum/thread43695.html http://www.thescripts.com/forum/thread554311.html Since nobody knows so far I walked the path of no risk and sticked to python 2.3. However, for myself there is no problem at all since I own a legal copy of Visual Studio.Net 2003. So for me, redistribution is not a problem at all. I cant speak of anyone else that might be using python, though. So if we come to an agreement that the windows package should be shipped with a more up-to-date python DLL, just tell me and it will be done. But I want it to be a matter of widespread agreement before I do that. I never used python and I dont know which version is most appropriate. If we come to a conclusion here just let me know and I will make it happen. Sorry for all the inconvenience so far. Greetings Yogi ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Preparing for 1.3.2
I don't know how i didn't notice it previously, but the bridge is not drawn over the swamp. I gave it a shot, but couldn't do any better than to draw the bridge over swamp-water but without the reeds. I'll do that, but hopefully Mog can put it back together the way it's supposed to be. This isn't a blocker for a dev release, but it is worth fixing if possible. -eleazar / j.w. bjerk Original Message Subject: Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Preparing for 1.3.2 From: Nils Kneuper [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, April 24, 2007 2:56 pm To: dev-talk wesnoth-dev@gna.org Okay, looks like all the real blockers are fixed. If everything is alright and noone starts to shout that I should not do so, I will release tomorrow in the afternoon (april 25th, about 17:00 GMT+2/CEST (Central European Summer Time)). So now my tasks for all of you: 1) Send a mail if there are any really important blockers left. 2) Update the changelog. 3) Tell me what to specifically mention in the release notes. That is all for the moment. If everything goes right I will tag in 21 hours. Cheers, Nils Kneuper aka Ivanovic ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] wesnoth and python
On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 00:01:04 +0200, Jörg Hinrichs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Python 2.4 / 2.5 is compiled with a microsoft runtime dll that needs to be redistributed. Redistribution requires a legal installation of Visual Studio.Net 2003. I doubt that that is compatible with the GPL. It might be worth someone looking into building python 2.4 using a different compiler. I started looking at this a long while back, and it didn't seem like an easy task for me. Some of you have more experience building software under Windows and it may not be as difficult a task for you. ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Preparing for 1.3.2
Mark de Wever [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 08:56:14PM +0200, Nils Kneuper wrote: Okay, looks like all the real blockers are fixed. If everything is alright and noone starts to shout that I should not do so, I will release tomorrow in the afternoon (april 25th, about 17:00 GMT+2/CEST (Central European Summer Time)). So now my tasks for all of you: 1) Send a mail if there are any really important blockers left. Can't think of blockers. Nor I. That the terrain system is converted and the letters are really fixed now, thus UMC is encouraged to convert their stuff. This is exactly why I spent 25 hours straight hammering on upconvert. I wanted it to be a production-quality tool that would make upward UMC conversion easy, and I felt it was very important to have that be in 1.3.2. Also the tools esr made might be nice to mention in the notes. Both scripts have detailed header comments. You should be able to extract something usable from that. That the terrain toprow has some small terrain glitches which is most noticable that villages are not always shown in the top row. Yeah. That bug really irritates me. I'm very close to calling it a blocker. -- a href=http://www.catb.org/~esr/;Eric S. Raymond/a ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
