<URL: http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=39575 >

Marko Lindqvist wrote:
> On 16/08/07, William Allen Simpson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> There is no documented packet specific capability string.
> 
>  version.in, common/cap<something>.c
> 
That is not a documented packet specific capability string.

It is neither:
  1) documented
nor
  2) packet specific

Traditionally, version.in is for releases, and should not be updated more
than once per release cycle.  It is not accessed except during configure.

You are misusing long understood industry terminology.

If there were packet specific capabilities, they would number in the
hundreds or thousands.  And would have been included in the packets.def
file, to be generated for every handler, and every individual packet.

For example, like tilespec capabilities, in each and every file.


>> IT'S VERY DANGEROUS TO RUN DEVELOPMENT CODE AGAINST RELEASED SERVERS.
> 
>  The very idea of capability string is to make sure that incompatible
> server/client do not accept connections from each other.

Then every development version.in needs a capability that is *never* in
the released version.in.  Because nobody should willy-nilly be compiling
development code and running it as or against a public server!

It's really not my problem that this project cannot get releases out the
door in a timely fashion, so poor saps in the field try to hack something
together as their own pseudo-release.

That's the fault of certain persons that disappear for months at a time,
leaving the makefiles, configuration, and code in a sorry state.


>  IT'S VERY STUPID TO INSIST DOING SAME MISTAKE AFTER IT HAS BEEN
> POINTED OUT TO YOU.
> 
It's not a mistake.  And you only mentioned such a thing in a very recent
posting.  The code of which he complains is from some time ago.




_______________________________________________
Freeciv-dev mailing list
Freeciv-dev@gna.org
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev

Reply via email to