Re: [warzone2100-dev] 1 hour left before the tagging of 2.3 B1 (also a comment about branches/2.2)
On 11/15/09, Zarel zarex...@x.com wrote: On Sat, Nov 14, 2009 at 12:10 PM, bugs buggy buginxx...@x.com wrote: About 1 hour left before I need to tag and build everything. This really is your last chance to get anything you wanted in 2.3B1. On Sat, Nov 14, 2009 at 2:53 PM, bugs buggy buginx...@x.com wrote: Warzone 2100 2.3 Beta 1 has now been released! But this isn't nearly as frustrating to me as the way you do it. Not nearly so bad this time, since the old version is still on the Download page since this is a beta. But usually, you just remove all other downloads from the download page, so for a short period of time, no one other than Windows users (and people who compile from source) can download Warzone. And for some reason, you see nothing wrong with this. Because there is nothing wrong with it? Seriously, when we do a new release, whatever the release is, then we want people to get the new release. The old versions go in the unsupported bin as far as I am concerned. We don't have the manpower to handle everything... Not even because I'm delaying the release, either. I usually get Mac builds up within 24 hours. It's been around 15 since tagging as of right now, and I have Mac builds up. That's shorter than the few days we're supposed to wait between tagging and announcing to release publicly. I've given up trying to convince you to leave old versions on the download page while the new versions haven't been built yet. But could you at least wait 24 hours for me? That's all I ask. I don't understand what the issue is time is short. I do as much as I can in the little amount of free time I have. I have no idea when or even if any other builds except the ones I make will (ever) be released. I have no clue if any of the other devs can or will do anything from the period I am off, to the period I get back. I don't know my schedule in advance, so that could be a few days or weeks or more. That is why, as soon as I finish the uploads, I throw them up, and have the Coming soon! tag for the missing versions. If I could make all builds I would, but unless Jobs sends me a mac, that isn't going to happen. When another dev can make the build they just edit the page... that isn't asking too much, and I am sure users understand that Coming soon! means just that... whenever someone has time to make it, they will. Time is the enemy here. ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
Re: [warzone2100-dev] 1 hour left before the tagging of 2.3 B1 (also a comment about branches/2.2)
On 11/15/09, Dennis Schridde devurx...@xx.net wrote: A strict code-freeze for, say, a week, including the thorough testing on all OSes/arches as mentioned above, with the final builds being created right after the tag, might work just as well. Again, only provided that it is guaranteed that everything actually happens as planned and everyone starts working during that freeze already. Experience and this thing being a game, run in spare time, make me sceptic. But why not try something new, if you feel that suits you better. I (and thus the release-checklist) certainly do not want to stay in the way of advancement, but rather explain why some rules were invented. If there are better solutions to old problems, that is certainly a good thing. That would never work with the limited manpower time constraints many of us have. In a perfect world, with enough people to do everything on the release checklist, sure, but as it is now, that just is not possible and very impractical. ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
Re: [warzone2100-dev] 1 hour left before the tagging of 2.3 B1 (also a comment about branches/2.2)
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 2:53 PM, bugs buggy buginato...@gmail.com wrote: Because there is nothing wrong with it? Seriously, when we do a new release, whatever the release is, then we want people to get the new release. The old versions go in the unsupported bin as far as I am concerned. A Coming soon! message is not a new release. The old versions can't go in the unsupported bin before the new version is released. We don't have the manpower to handle everything... We have the manpower to release a new version before we remove the old version from the download page. I don't understand what the issue is time is short. I do as much as I can in the little amount of free time I have. I have no idea when or even if any other builds except the ones I make will (ever) be released. So? Let the rest of us handle it. I have no clue if any of the other devs can or will do anything from the period I am off, to the period I get back. I don't know my schedule in advance, so that could be a few days or weeks or more. That's no reason to handle a release so haphazardly. If you can't do a release well, just do the first half and let us clean up and do the release announcements, don't do it yourself poorly! That is why, as soon as I finish the uploads, I throw them up, and have the Coming soon! tag for the missing versions. If I could make all builds I would, but unless Jobs sends me a mac, that isn't going to happen. I told you, there are two superior options here: 1. Don't throw them up at all (and don't announce them). We can do that when we have the builds. 2. Leave the old version there, so people can download them. All I ask is that you do one of those (preferably the first). I believe we are in consensus that the first is the best option here. What is your objection to that? When another dev can make the build they just edit the page... that isn't asking too much, and I am sure users understand that Coming soon! means just that... whenever someone has time to make it, they will. There is no reason why a user should ever have to wait, if a version already exists. On the other hand, having coming soon appear on the Download page is a good way to turn away new users forever. If you find a new game online, but the download page just says Coming soon!, you're going to leave and probably forget about it. But that really distracts from the main point, which is that there's NO REASON why the user should see that message in the first place, instead of a download for the game they came to download. -Zarel ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
Re: [warzone2100-dev] 1 hour left before the tagging of 2.3 B1 (also a comment about branches/2.2)
On Sat, Nov 14, 2009 at 12:10 PM, bugs buggy buginato...@gmail.com wrote: About 1 hour left before I need to tag and build everything. This really is your last chance to get anything you wanted in 2.3B1. On Sat, Nov 14, 2009 at 2:53 PM, bugs buggy buginato...@gmail.com wrote: Warzone 2100 2.3 Beta 1 has now been released! GAH. I don't know how to put this. Look... http://developer.wz2100.net/wiki/ReleaseChecklist Wait a few days between tagging and actually announcing the release publicly I know you never listen to me regarding releases, but at least listen to the Release Checklist? But this isn't nearly as frustrating to me as the way you do it. Not nearly so bad this time, since the old version is still on the Download page since this is a beta. But usually, you just remove all other downloads from the download page, so for a short period of time, no one other than Windows users (and people who compile from source) can download Warzone. And for some reason, you see nothing wrong with this. Not even because I'm delaying the release, either. I usually get Mac builds up within 24 hours. It's been around 15 since tagging as of right now, and I have Mac builds up. That's shorter than the few days we're supposed to wait between tagging and announcing to release publicly. I've given up trying to convince you to leave old versions on the download page while the new versions haven't been built yet. But could you at least wait 24 hours for me? That's all I ask. -Zarel ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
Re: [warzone2100-dev] 1 hour left before the tagging of 2.3 B1 (also a comment about branches/2.2)
Zarel wrote: I've given up trying to convince you to leave old versions on the download page while the new versions haven't been built yet. But could you at least wait 24 hours for me? That's all I ask. Zarel, I think the problems are the time constraints. To me it seems that Buginator is the main person for releases and he is limited to a few hours on weekends. So the problem is that delaying the release for a day or two would actually delay the release for a whole week. It really is far from the optimum and it could be done better, but with the current lack of man power this just is not feasible IMHO. Or would you prefer to wait a whole week between tagging and release? - Kreuvf signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
Re: [warzone2100-dev] 1 hour left before the tagging of 2.3 B1 (also a comment about branches/2.2)
On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 4:38 AM, Kreuvf kre...@warzone2100.de wrote: Zarel, I think the problems are the time constraints. To me it seems that Buginator is the main person for releases and he is limited to a few hours on weekends. So the problem is that delaying the release for a day or two would actually delay the release for a whole week. It really is far from the optimum and it could be done better, but with the current lack of man power this just is not feasible IMHO. Or would you prefer to wait a whole week between tagging and release? Well, there's no reason why Buggy has to handle the entire release, especially if it causes it to be this far from optimum. If he's not available 24 hours after tagging, I can announce the release then, or so could any other dev... Especially since the release announcement is written ahead of time, and just moved from Staff to News when the release is announced. -Zarel ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
Re: [warzone2100-dev] 1 hour left before the tagging of 2.3 B1 (also a comment about branches/2.2)
On Sunday, 15 November 2009 at 4:23, Zarel wrote: Wait a few days between tagging and actually announcing the release publicly Isn't that rule kind of stupid anyway? I thought tags should be touched as little as possible after tagging, so the waiting period should be before, not after the tag. And Buginator announced his intention to tag 24 hours before, so there was some time to test/commit pending stuff/whatever. Download page since this is a beta. But usually, you just remove all other downloads from the download page, so for a short period of time, no one other than Windows users (and people who compile from source) And people who can read and find the SF/GNA links. On Sunday, 15 November 2009 at 4:44, Zarel wrote: Well, there's no reason why Buggy has to handle the entire release, Do we have someone else who can make (good) Windows builds? I thought there were some problems with the crashdumps or something if you don't have exactly the right setup. ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
Re: [warzone2100-dev] 1 hour left before the tagging of 2.3 B1 (also a comment about branches/2.2)
Hello everyone. Am Sonntag, 15. November 2009 20:43:50 schrieb Christian Ohm: On Sunday, 15 November 2009 at 4:23, Zarel wrote: Wait a few days between tagging and actually announcing the release publicly Isn't that rule kind of stupid anyway? I thought tags should be touched as little as possible after tagging, so the waiting period should be before, not after the tag. And Buginator announced his intention to tag 24 hours before, so there was some time to test/commit pending stuff/whatever. I do not think that this rule is stupid. But then I wrote it originally, so I may be biased. It is based on lots of bad experience, and I can also tell you that the few days in that sentence certainly has a purpose. What we had once, was tag, push out src tarball, then the Windows guy would come and try to build, oh it does not, fix, push out windows build. A little while later someone is building for Mac: try to build, oh it does not, fix, push out the mac build. Then someone actually tried to run the game on, say, Windows. Oups, it crashes in level 17 of campaign 40 now, and it is talking about some wrong filename - fix, push out a new build. What we had in the end was 1 tag, 1 tarball, and 3 builds from revisions (or not even that) no one was able to figure out later on. Saying we are going to tag next week, please build and test did not help a bit. Announcing the release on the website along with uploading the tarballs made the stuff just worse, because ppl actually downloaded that stuff (who can blame them), and, in case the release contained critical errors and thus had to be retagged, the confusion increased. Thus the rule: wait a few days between tagging and releasing. I am very sceptic that quality will not suffer if you rely on ppl testing after someone writes an email to the list that he is about to tag 24h later. Not only are not many ppl reading this, they are also too lazy to actually test, especially not quickly, and the actual workers have full time schedules, which do not permit them to throw away whatever they were doing at that moment and just jump into WZ QA instead. Download page since this is a beta. But usually, you just remove all other downloads from the download page, so for a short period of time, no one other than Windows users (and people who compile from source) And people who can read and find the SF/GNA links. But no users. Since users usually do not dig into any devstuff sites for links. On Sunday, 15 November 2009 at 4:44, Zarel wrote: Well, there's no reason why Buggy has to handle the entire release, Do we have someone else who can make (good) Windows builds? I thought there were some problems with the crashdumps or something if you don't have exactly the right setup. There are issues (but they are fixable - don't look at me, I don't have time). If Buginator creates the Windows builds, that would be a nice task already. I think what Zarel means is that he does not also have to carry out the tagging, tarballing, announcements, etc, if that would mean that others cannot get stuff to build and test in time. Regards, devurandom 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
Re: [warzone2100-dev] 1 hour left before the tagging of 2.3 B1 (also a comment about branches/2.2)
On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 1:43 PM, Christian Ohm chr@gmx.net wrote: Isn't that rule kind of stupid anyway? I thought tags should be touched as little as possible after tagging, so the waiting period should be before, not after the tag. And Buginator announced his intention to tag 24 hours before, so there was some time to test/commit pending stuff/whatever. Unfortunately, I can't build Mac binaries from an intention to tag. :| And people who can read and find the SF/GNA links. Which don't exist yet, because of how fast the release is being rushed out. That's kind of the point of my ML request. Do we have someone else who can make (good) Windows builds? I thought there were some problems with the crashdumps or something if you don't have exactly the right setup. I didn't say we don't let Buggy do anything at all. I'm just saying, since the problem appears to be with the 24 hour waiting period, we simply let someone else do the release announcements after said period, which appears to consist of moving a post from the staff forums to the news forums, and copy/pasting that post into an ML announcement. I'm sure any of us are capable of doing that. -Zarel ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
Re: [warzone2100-dev] 1 hour left before the tagging of 2.3 B1 (also a comment about branches/2.2)
On Sunday, 15 November 2009 at 21:11, Dennis Schridde wrote: What we had once, was tag, push out src tarball, then the Windows guy would come and try to build, oh it does not, fix, push out windows build. A little while later someone is building for Mac: try to build, oh it does not, fix, push out the mac build. Well, now we have Buginator who does a Windows build for release, so no problems there, and Linux build breakage is also no problem recently I think. That leaves the Mac builds, which I can't say much about. Then someone actually tried to run the game on, say, Windows. Oups, it crashes in level 17 of campaign 40 now, and it is talking about some wrong filename - fix, push out a new build. That doesn't sound like a bug that would be detected in a few days, since we don't have any dedicated testers for every release... What we had in the end was 1 tag, 1 tarball, and 3 builds from revisions (or not even that) no one was able to figure out later on. Saying we are going to tag next week, please build and test did not help a bit. Announcing the release on the website along with uploading the tarballs made the stuff just worse, because ppl actually downloaded that stuff (who can blame them), and, in case the release contained critical errors and thus had to be retagged, the confusion increased. Thus the rule: wait a few days between tagging and releasing. I am very sceptic that quality will not suffer if you rely on ppl testing after someone writes an email to the list that he is about to tag 24h later. Not only are not many ppl reading this, they are also too lazy to actually test, especially not quickly, and the actual workers have full time schedules, which do not permit them to throw away whatever they were doing at that moment and just jump into WZ QA instead. Hm, AFAIR SVN wasn't broken that often recently, and usually gets fixed quite fast when it is. And if something in the game is broken, chances that someone will find it in the few days are few, Download page since this is a beta. But usually, you just remove all other downloads from the download page, so for a short period of time, no one other than Windows users (and people who compile from source) And people who can read and find the SF/GNA links. But no users. Since users usually do not dig into any devstuff sites for links. And nobody actually reads the downloads page, it seems... there is an older releases section with links to the correct SF/GNA dirs (admittedly the first link is to the wiki releases page that wasn't updated since 2.2 beta2, I brought it somewhat up to date, though I left the gathering of the various binary links to someone else). Do we have someone else who can make (good) Windows builds? I thought there were some problems with the crashdumps or something if you don't have exactly the right setup. There are issues (but they are fixable - don't look at me, I don't have time). If Buginator creates the Windows builds, that would be a nice task already. I think what Zarel means is that he does not also have to carry out the tagging, tarballing, announcements, etc, if that would mean that others cannot get stuff to build and test in time. Well, Buginator does the Windows builds, and those should be done from a tag (and I think doing the tarball then isn't really much work anyway). Though he wouldn't have to do the actual announcement, maybe just prepare a rudimentary post in the staff forum that then gets finished and moved to news when all builds are available. ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
Re: [warzone2100-dev] 1 hour left before the tagging of 2.3 B1 (also a comment about branches/2.2)
On Sunday, 15 November 2009 at 14:20, Zarel wrote: Unfortunately, I can't build Mac binaries from an intention to tag. :| Oh, ok, I misunderstood that. I agree that a short period to prepare other builds is ok, so they can all be announced together. And people who can read and find the SF/GNA links. Which don't exist yet, because of how fast the release is being rushed out. That's kind of the point of my ML request. I meant the links to the old version, which you complained about being removed. There's still the older versions section on the download page, where those are linked. ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
Re: [warzone2100-dev] 1 hour left before the tagging of 2.3 B1 (also a comment about branches/2.2)
Am Sonntag, 15. November 2009 22:23:34 schrieb Christian Ohm: On Sunday, 15 November 2009 at 21:11, Dennis Schridde wrote: Then someone actually tried to run the game on, say, Windows. Oups, it crashes in level 17 of campaign 40 now, and it is talking about some wrong filename - fix, push out a new build. That doesn't sound like a bug that would be detected in a few days, since we don't have any dedicated testers for every release... Exactly. But there are these users which actually happen to be playing at that level right now, and they will find such issues in the build system / a mod / a new file / ... right when they install the new version. Admitting that my example was a bit far fetched, several times situations occurred, where quick users, using the tarball right when it was announced, found issues which we missed before. That even happened just hours after the announcement, so in just a few hours there were several versions floating around. Resulting in different OSes, arches or distros having different bugs to fight with. It was annoying to work with: Crashdumps did not match the actual code, bugs appeared which should not happen, tarball-checksums for distros like Gentoo failed, other distros did not notice the replaced tarballs at all, etc. Thus it seemed better to wait a bit longer before making the final tag public, to catch such situations. (Eager users are still downloading tarballs right when the ML says its uploaded, or even download from SVN. And they also can cope with we retagged, download again. At least that's how it was back then.) If it could be guaranteed that every OS/arch/distro is being built for and tested thoroughly immediately after the tag happened (and not before, since that calls for inconsistency), then I agree that this could work, too. As a safety measure the forced slowdown seemed appropriate. A strict code-freeze for, say, a week, including the thorough testing on all OSes/arches as mentioned above, with the final builds being created right after the tag, might work just as well. Again, only provided that it is guaranteed that everything actually happens as planned and everyone starts working during that freeze already. Experience and this thing being a game, run in spare time, make me sceptic. But why not try something new, if you feel that suits you better. I (and thus the release-checklist) certainly do not want to stay in the way of advancement, but rather explain why some rules were invented. If there are better solutions to old problems, that is certainly a good thing. Regards, devurandom 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
Re: [warzone2100-dev] 1 hour left before the tagging of 2.3 B1 (also a comment about branches/2.2)
On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 3:30 PM, Christian Ohm chr@gmx.net wrote: I meant the links to the old version, which you complained about being removed. There's still the older versions section on the download page, where those are linked. True, but they're intended as a contingency in case of unplanned severe bugs in the most recent version, or historical purposes, etc. They're not meant for end users, and they're hidden away far too much to be. -Zarel ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
[warzone2100-dev] 1 hour left before the tagging of 2.3 B1 (also a comment about branches/2.2)
About 1 hour left before I need to tag and build everything. This really is your last chance to get anything you wanted in 2.3B1. Commit to 2.2_net! For branches/2.2, I will not be doing anymore comits to that, since I don't see a real need for it. 2.2_net will be where all (my) work will be done, since I just don't have time to backport everything. Also, with the anti-dpid stuff, things start to break very quickly for the multi*.c and netcode changes. Which means, there is no easy 1:1 porting from 2.2_net back to 2.2. Yes, I plan on porting the patches from 2.2_net back to trunk, when I get back. :) ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
