On Sat, Nov 14, 2009 at 6:07 AM, bugs buggy wrote:
>> Can we rename the files from .txt to .csv? That might make modding easier.
>
> Not really for it, I don't like renaming files, would mean we must
> revert all those files if we need to hunt for bugs, and that is such a
> PITA with svn.
'svn mo
Zarel wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 8:19 AM, Per Inge Mathisen
> wrote:
>> But I think Excel will deduce what it is when clicking on the file,
>> and open it as a CSV.
>
> Exactly. To edit the CSV data right now, I have to rename the files to
> .csv, edit them, then rename back to .txt, which i
On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 8:19 AM, Per Inge Mathisen
wrote:
> But I think Excel will deduce what it is when clicking on the file,
> and open it as a CSV.
Exactly. To edit the CSV data right now, I have to rename the files to
.csv, edit them, then rename back to .txt, which is a real hassle.
Since th
On 11/8/09, Zarel wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 7:29 PM, bugs buggy wrote:
> > The CSV format is much more easier to troubleshoot (old code worked
> > fine before), and as a added plus, it appears we are getting more
> > editors made for modifying this stuff. Hopefully, they will do a QT
Per Inge Mathisen wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 2:18 PM, Kreuvf wrote:
>> Joe Average doesn't know what CSV stands for and is able to deduce how the
>> entries are organised from simply looking at the file.
>
> But I think Excel will deduce what it is when clicking on the file,
> and open it as
On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 2:18 PM, Kreuvf wrote:
> Joe Average doesn't know what CSV stands for and is able to deduce how the
> entries are organised from simply looking at the file.
But I think Excel will deduce what it is when clicking on the file,
and open it as a CSV. Another thing that could ma
Zarel wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 7:29 PM, bugs buggy wrote:
>> The CSV format is much more easier to troubleshoot (old code worked
>> fine before), and as a added plus, it appears we are getting more
>> editors made for modifying this stuff. Hopefully, they will do a QT
>> port of it. (Ye
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 7:29 PM, bugs buggy wrote:
> The CSV format is much more easier to troubleshoot (old code worked
> fine before), and as a added plus, it appears we are getting more
> editors made for modifying this stuff. Hopefully, they will do a QT
> port of it. (Yes, I know we could
On 10/30/09, Per Inge Mathisen wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 2:29 AM, bugs buggy wrote:
> > Thus, I wish to revert all SQL changes in 2.2 (yes, it still has sql
> > stuff in it) and trunk.
>
>
> I support this.
>
> - Per
Done.
Everyone can now test :)
___
On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 2:29 AM, bugs buggy wrote:
> Thus, I wish to revert all SQL changes in 2.2 (yes, it still has sql
> stuff in it) and trunk.
I support this.
- Per
___
Warzone-dev mailing list
Warzone-dev@gna.org
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/
As was previously discussed numerous times, I would like to actually
do it now while I have some time to do this.
While the original intent of using SQL was good in theory, in
practice, it adds another layer of complexity and another area of
speciality that we could do without.
The meta language i
11 matches
Mail list logo
