On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 9:40 PM, bugs buggy wrote:
> Now with 2.2 out of the way, I was thinking that our new roadmap would
> look something like this:
>
> 2.3 new terrain (with netplay integration?)
> 2.4 lua integration
> 2.5 'betawidget' integration
>
> Of course, things can change, as we get mo
> 2009/6/1 bugs buggy :
>> I tested a few changes, and fixed tile-73.png, tile-51.png,
>> tile-50.png, tile-49.png, tile-72.png (the tracks), and these are the
>> results so far:
>> http://imagebin.ca/view/fkmJrERR.html and http://imagebin.ca/view/YW2tae.html
http://imagebin.ca/view/xLiOkU1X.html
Hmm, from the second one, it appears there are a few other tiles you
haven't managed yet.
If we just turn it into generic burnt patches, I think that'd be good.
-Zarel
2009/6/1 bugs buggy :
> I tested a few changes, and fixed tile-73.png, tile-51.png,
> tile-50.png, tile-49.png, tile-72.png (the
I tested a few changes, and fixed tile-73.png, tile-51.png,
tile-50.png, tile-49.png, tile-72.png (the tracks), and these are the
results so far:
http://imagebin.ca/view/fkmJrERR.html and http://imagebin.ca/view/YW2tae.html
I only fixed the 128x128 tertiles, and then I wondered why do we even
both
hi all
Am Montag, den 01.06.2009, 11:30 +0200 schrieb Dennis Schridde:
> Am Montag, 1. Juni 2009 04:38:35 schrieb bugs buggy:
> > We have released 2.2.
yeehaaa, congratulations, awesome job :D
elio
___
Warzone-dev mailing list
Warzone-dev@gna.org
http
Now with 2.2 out of the way, I was thinking that our new roadmap would
look something like this:
2.3 new terrain (with netplay integration?)
2.4 lua integration
2.5 'betawidget' integration
Of course, things can change, as we get more help.
I also think that we should be releasing 2.3 beta cand
On 6/1/09, kim metcalfe wrote:
> what??? this is confusing. what exactly is the revision number.
> and where did the error creep in and why did the error creep in... how
> can this be prevented in the future. i thought this was not supposed
> to happen... i remember the problems from way
what??? this is confusing. what exactly is the revision number.
and where did the error creep in and why did the error creep in... how
can this be prevented in the future. i thought this was not supposed
to happen... i remember the problems from way back... geez.
On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 11:45
On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 7:35 PM, wrote:
> Change configure.ac to point to 2.2.0 instead of 2.2
Isn't this a little late? It makes it look like the error was not
made, while it was. Let's set it to 2.0.1 already in 2.2 branch
instead.
- Per
___
Warzon
Am Montag, 1. Juni 2009 19:12:22 schrieb bugs buggy:
> On 6/1/09, Dennis Schridde wrote:
> > P.S. I uploaded the Windows installer and the source tarball to Gna and
> > fixed the version numbers. Filename of the installer was corrected, and I
> > rebuilt the tarball.
>
> I noticed that on both li
On 6/1/09, Dennis Schridde wrote:
> P.S. I uploaded the Windows installer and the source tarball to Gna and fixed
> the version numbers. Filename of the installer was corrected, and I rebuilt
> the tarball.
>
I noticed that on both linux & my VM (for building windows installer),
that it only s
On Mon, Jun 01, 2009 at 11:19:55AM +0200, Kreuvf wrote:
> Per Inge Mathisen wrote:
>>> I don't think units can drive over the rearm pads?
>>
>> I could change that. It makes sense.
>
> Hopefully those ground units don't shoo away the VTOLs then, especially during
> re-arming.
Agreed, provided th
Am Montag, 1. Juni 2009 04:38:35 schrieb bugs buggy:
> We have released 2.2.
Congratulations to everyone involved, especially Buginator!
You are doing a marvellous job in keeping this running!
Greetings,
DevUrandom
P.S. I uploaded the Windows installer and the source tarball to Gna and fixed
the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Per Inge Mathisen wrote:
>> I don't think units can drive over the rearm pads?
>
> I could change that. It makes sense.
Hopefully those ground units don't shoo away the VTOLs then, especially during
re-arming.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: Gn
On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 4:43 AM, bugs buggy wrote:
> I thought that anything but the walls had spaces, so that the AI can
> find a path around it?
Anything but walls and defense buildings.
> I don't think units can drive over the rearm pads?
I could change that. It makes sense.
- Per
___
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Zarel wrote:
> On second thought, Mortar Fast Loader should be renamed to Mortar
> Rapid Loader. All the "Fast Loader" research items, like "Sensor
> Upgrade", are boilerplate text that Pumpkin never got around to
> replacing. Ideas?
I don't care, but
2009/6/1 Kreuvf :
> The ChangeLog states that "Mortar Fast Loader requires Mortar Rapid Loader
> Mk3",
> but I cannot find "Mortar Rapid Loader" (or any line containing mortar and
> rapid) by grepping for it in the po files. I did some research then and found
> the following:
>
> Looking at the ch
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The ChangeLog states that "Mortar Fast Loader requires Mortar Rapid Loader Mk3",
but I cannot find "Mortar Rapid Loader" (or any line containing mortar and
rapid) by grepping for it in the po files. I did some research then and found
the following:
Lo
18 matches
Mail list logo
