Am Montag, 22. September 2008 10:51:15 schrieb Freddie Witherden: > Hi Dennis/Buggy > > On 22 Sep 2008, at 09:27, Dennis Schridde wrote: > > Am Montag, 22. September 2008 04:32:13 schrieb bugs buggy: > >> While this has been discussed before, I feel that we need more > >> input from > >> everyone, so I created a poll to see what the community thinks is > >> the best > >> course of action. > >> > >> This concerns if we should do a 2.1 beta 5, or skip 2.1 beta 5, and > >> do a > >> 2.2 beta 1. > >> In either case, there must be another beta. > > > > I vote for 2.1_beta5 for the reasons stated earlier. > > > > We cannot release 2.2 just now. You are giving a wrong impression to > > the > > community... > > I *will* be full of bugs, several things may need to be removed if > > you want to > > start releasing it within the next one or two months, several things > > will not > > be finished till then, etc... > > So you need at least till December for a release, imo. > > Obviously not telling the community these things (in the question > > already, > > people are likely to click before they have read everything), and > > making them > > think "2.1 is crap, but we could get 2.2 just now" resulted in those > > wrong > > votes. > > Betawidget and some of Giel's stat stuff will need to be removed. > However, I have been playing it recently (as have quite a few others) > and would not consider it much more buggy than 2.1. > > Try playing 2.1_beta4, it is quite poor so far as releases go. > 2.1_beta5 is not going to go down well with people either if we break > their save games (will probably cause them not to upgrade). That reminds me that we need some way to have backward compatibility somehow. Savegame-wise and whatever else might need it. At least so much as there is a simple way of conversion.
Speaking of conversion: The only thing that makes =2.1_beta4 games not load in >2.1_beta4 is that the static gateway and zone information is missing? Can't we just copy that from the original map again? (In a conversion step, maybe as an external tool if necessary.) You may say, blahblah, it's just 2.1_beta5 and does not offer as many great things as 2.2 (which no one can tell me is going to arrive in the next week or even month). But we need some backward compatibility layer anyway, so we could use this as a testbed... > >> http://forums.wz2100.net/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2188 > >> > >> The reasons have (more or less) already been discussed on this list > >> already. > >> > >> But let me add that savegames are a very good debugging tool, and > >> *if* we > >> release a 2.1 beta 5 that will break savegames since beta 4, and > >> trunk as > >> well, there will be no easy way to load those games up, and see if > >> the same > >> issue is present in trunk or not. > > > > 2.1_beta5 would add the gateway section back to savegames, right? > > And that would make them unable to load in trunk? > > They would be loadable in trunk. But anything created in 2.1_beta4 > would not be loadable in 2.1_beta5 (although they would also work in > trunk). So the point that 2.1_beta5 savegames will break again in 2.2 is simply misinformation?
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
