On Sun, 25 Sep 2022 17:46:42 +0000 Stian Grenborgen <stian...@student.matnat.uio.no> wrote: > I have noticed that some of the game/client options could have been > implemented using a mod ... and some of the mods (like convertUpgrade) seem > more suitable for an option. > > Perhaps we should make a SpecificationChangeOption with a specification as a > child element? The option could be displayed as a checkbox for enabling the > change. > > Another possible solution would be having an option called > AlternativeModOption where the player could choose from a dropdown list of > mods. Mods like this would be hidden from the normal mod list. This could be > used for functionality like choosing between "Default map controls", "Small > Map Controls" and "Compact Map Controls". > > Would a change like this make stuff easier to find/understand ... or do you > think it might make it unnecessarily complex?
I am not seeing a big win here, other than (apparently) we have useful mods[1] that could have better visibility. There have been a few whinges that we have too many options so I am hesitant to endorse opening up a whole new category:-). Cheers, Mike Pope [1] IIRC the Casas mod was a mod because: - someone wanted to play a "classic Col1 but with obvious bugs like Casas fixed" game, but did not want all the extras in the freecol-ruleset - the unit type change code was pretty new/volatile at the time so it was less likely to cause general bugs if it started as a mod ...so notwithstanding my above reservations, by now it is probably a good candidate to graduate to an option.
pgpSeogVLbmSk.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Freecol-developers mailing list Freecol-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freecol-developers
