http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=40408 >
Oh, my bad actually. I didn't notice there was a ticket already describing
exactly the same bug as I was tackling with. ;) Your patch seems to be more
thoroughly cleaning up some messy code while I was just looking for a
quick&dirty soluti
http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=40408 >
> [nicorwadh - Sun Aug 03 21:35:49 2008]:
>
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] - So 27. Jul 2008, 17:10:31]:
> >
> > Depending on the order of packets being correct is, in general, very
> > bad. Each packet should be independent.
>
> I agree on that s
http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=40408 >
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] - So 27. Jul 2008, 17:10:31]:
>
> Depending on the order of packets being correct is, in general, very
> bad. Each packet should be independent.
I agree on that so it is probably most sensible to let the apropiate
funct
http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=40408 >
On Sat, Jul 26, 2008 at 7:47 PM, Nicolas R. Wadhwani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=40408 >
>
> Hi,
>
> In current trunk version if you capture an enemy city it still looks like it
> would belong
http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=40408 >
Hi,
In current trunk version if you capture an enemy city it still looks like it
would belong to the previous owner before you captured it. Only if you would
quit the game and rejoin/reload the captured city would appear in your city
list
