Follow-up Comment #12, bug #21576 (project freeciv): I think the default.lua is the opposite (or maybe both-ways): Before ruleset specific script.lua was split out of it, every ruleset had the default.lua. So I think Christian now has multiplayer/default.lua from an ancient version even when playing modern version. However, we cannot simply always use default/default.lua, but a ruleset must have an option to define one itself. While we try to keep default/default.lua as generic as possible, it doesn't work for all kind of rulesets. So there might be default.lua in a ruleset that currently hasn't (it's somewhat likely in case of alien ruleset if we don't make default/default.lua to much more dynamic in its behavior) I'm not sure how include in .lua would work.
As for what we support, I think user is responsible to uninstall before making new install. The problem is having one version installed (presumably stable release) and developing/running development version from build dir. Then the development version sees files of the installed version in FREECIV_xxx_PATH. So I think stubs should be present when ever recent release has files that may cause problems for running from the build dir. It's then the definition of "recent" that we're missing, but as a Debian user I count at least package in current stable (but not oldstable) Debian and anything newer as "recent". And yes, I now realize that the original bug does not count as 2.4.2 blocker by these definitions. It's only when 2.5.0-beta1 gets released when S2_4 *development version to be run from build dir* must have stubs in place. _______________________________________________________ Reply to this item at: <http://gna.org/bugs/?21576> _______________________________________________ Message sent via/by Gna! http://gna.org/ _______________________________________________ Freeciv-dev mailing list Freecivfirstname.lastname@example.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev