Hello, On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 10:03:14AM +0000, Richard Dobson wrote: > > >Seems like it would be nice to resurrect the idea of game layer. May I > >suggest to write down what people want from the protocol to accomplish > >before starting thinking about it (be it me or someone else). This seems > >to lead to a situation where each client and server supports one game > >and if you want to play something else, you need to use different server. > > > >Thought such discussion should happen on JIG probably. > > Well what I am implementing is basically a simplification of the game > layer idea, personally id rather get something working before coming > back to discuss it to avoid any arguments or misunderstandings on how to > do it, id rather have a proof of concept so people can see something > working.
First, as much as I knew, you are not the only one doing so, therefore after a while, there will be a rain of proofs of concepts. Second, someone will shout, hey, but what this feature you just can not exclude? You throw all that away and start again or will you try to press the feature somehow into it? I did not want to discuss how to accomplish these things, but what the protocol should support, like it should be able to do multiplayer and someone will want a tournament support, some games will want server-less mode and so. I had my chess working ad I actually only described the protocol I used. It just got thrown away, so being you, I would discuss it earlier than later. But of course, it's up to you, this is just MHO. Have a nice day -- Work with computer has 2 phases. First, computer waits for the user to tell it what to do, then the user waits for the computer to do it. Therefore, computer work consists mostly of waiting. Michal "vorner" Vaner
pgpDG19JZCCQL.pgp
Description: PGP signature
