Follow-up Comment #20, bug #18767 (project freeciv):
Just to clarify, the CMA does not look at the value of gold_upkeep_style.
I have not looked at, why gold_upkeep_style=2 could resolve the issue (as
described in comment #13), as the flawed pruning caused (at least in my game)
many unnecessary
Follow-up Comment #2, patch #3718 (project freeciv):
Ah, I meant that units which the user has explicitly asked to fortify which
are in cities would get the permanent-F state (to indicate that they're not
getting a bonus from the user's action), not that all units inside cities
without other
Update of bug #20361 (project freeciv):
Status: Ready For Test = Fixed
Open/Closed:Open = Closed
___
Reply to this item at:
Update of bug #20520 (project freeciv):
Status: Ready For Test = Fixed
Open/Closed:Open = Closed
___
Reply to this item at:
Update of patch #3704 (project freeciv):
Status: Ready For Test = Done
Open/Closed:Open = Closed
___
Reply to this item at:
Update of patch #3689 (project freeciv):
Status: Ready For Test = Done
Open/Closed:Open = Closed
___
Reply to this item at:
Update of patch #3705 (project freeciv):
Status: Ready For Test = Done
Open/Closed:Open = Closed
___
Reply to this item at:
Update of bug #20494 (project freeciv):
Assigned to:None = pepeto
Planned Release: = 2.3.5, 2.4.0, 2.5.0
___
Follow-up Comment #4:
I vaguely remember
Update of bug #20490 (project freeciv):
Assigned to:None = pepeto
___
Reply to this item at:
http://gna.org/bugs/?20490
___
Message posté
Follow-up Comment #8, patch #3384 (project freeciv):
I had a go with this on S2_4, and while workers do now run away from land
units unless accompanied by a bodyguard, workers on the coast are still
oblivious to a battleship sat next to them.
I think this is due to is_square_threatened() calling
Follow-up Comment #1, bug #20508 (project freeciv):
(Committed in r22366
http://svn.gna.org/viewcvs/freeciv?revision=22366view=revision.)
___
Reply to this item at:
http://gna.org/bugs/?20508
Follow-up Comment #2, patch #2190 (project freeciv):
New version attached (minor change):
* Don't allow digital boolean from metaservers (actually there is no boolean
read).
(file #17259)
___
Additional Item Attachment:
File name:
Follow-up Comment #12, bug #20361 (project freeciv):
Where this needs more consideration is the experimental ruleset.
If the defender is on a tile that the attacker could not enter
except via road, then totally negating the road will make the
defender unreachable.
I don't think this
Update of bug #20361 (project freeciv):
Operating System: Microsoft Windows = Any
___
Reply to this item at:
http://gna.org/bugs/?20361
___
Message sent
Follow-up Comment #13, bug #20361 (project freeciv):
Will the committed fix need adjusting once cardinal-move-only
roads/rivers exist?
I don't think so. The last part of the path is considered as a single move
only if the move was previously possible.
Follow-up Comment #1, patch #3700 (project freeciv):
- Updated against svn HEAD
(file #17260)
___
Additional Item Attachment:
File name: NaturalRoadsNotRestricted-2.patch Size:8 KB
Follow-up Comment #1, patch #3714 (project freeciv):
- Do not remove support for drawing cardinal only roads with roadstyles other
than River, but just change it so that it's determined from road move_mode
- Applies on top of patch #3700
(file #17261)
Update of patch #3710 (project freeciv):
Status: Ready For Test = Done
Assigned to:None = cazfi
Open/Closed:Open = Closed
URL:
http://gna.org/patch/?3723
Summary: River gfx tag tx.river - river
Project: Freeciv
Submitted by: cazfi
Submitted on: Tue 19 Feb 2013 12:27:08 PM EET
Category: client
Priority: 5 - Normal
Update of bug #18006 (project freeciv):
Status:None = Need Info
___
Reply to this item at:
http://gna.org/bugs/?18006
___
Message sent
Update of patch #3706 (project freeciv):
Status: Ready For Test = Done
Open/Closed:Open = Closed
___
Follow-up Comment #2:
Documentation
Follow-up Comment #3, patch #3706 (project freeciv):
Documentation updated at wikia.
I haven't been following closely. Did this require some code-side change
first? That is; does wiki ruleset documentation need to document that this is
new behavior in 2.5? Latest freeciv release is 2.3, so
Follow-up Comment #4, patch #3706 (project freeciv):
I haven't been following closely. Did this require some
code-side change first? That is; does wiki ruleset
documentation need to document that this is new behavior in
2.5? Latest freeciv release is 2.3, so documentation in wiki
should be
Update of patch #3707 (project freeciv):
Status: Ready For Test = Done
Open/Closed:Open = Closed
___
Follow-up Comment #2:
Documentation
Update of bug #20495 (project freeciv):
Status:None = Need Info
___
Follow-up Comment #1:
Noticed that units fortifying have a increasing activity count.
I was wrong. The activity of
Update of bug #17216 (project freeciv):
Status:None = Duplicate
Open/Closed:Open = Closed
___
Follow-up Comment #3:
My original report
Follow-up Comment #7, bug #17354 (project freeciv):
It happens when you are too fast to push the load button. I guess same thing
can happen on scenario. However, the page takes longer to be displayed, I
cannot reproduce with it.
___
Reply
Update of bug #17354 (project freeciv):
Status:None = Ready For Test
___
Follow-up Comment #8:
The patch I attach fix the problem for me. But it also delays for a while the
apparition of the
URL:
http://gna.org/bugs/?20533
Summary: Missing building gfx for experimental ruleset:
Hospital, Genetic Lab
Project: Freeciv
Submitted by: jtn
Submitted on: Tue Feb 19 21:31:50 2013
Category: art
URL:
http://gna.org/bugs/?20534
Summary: Worklist glitch: unit icons bleed past their
boundaries
Project: Freeciv
Submitted by: jtn
Submitted on: Tue Feb 19 22:47:35 2013
Category: client-gtk-2.0
Severity:
Follow-up Comment #1, bug #20534 (project freeciv):
(FWIW, my previous notes on the issue in their entirety:
client/gui-gtk-2.0/wldlg.c:cell_render_func(). Make of that what you will.)
___
Reply to this item at:
URL:
http://gna.org/bugs/?20535
Summary: Road icons in editor are a bit ugly
Project: Freeciv
Submitted by: jtn
Submitted on: Tue Feb 19 22:56:03 2013
Category: editor
Severity: 2 - Minor
URL:
http://gna.org/bugs/?20536
Summary: Missing icon for roads in editor
Project: Freeciv
Submitted by: jtn
Submitted on: Tue Feb 19 23:00:20 2013
Category: art
Severity: 2 - Minor
URL:
http://gna.org/patch/?3724
Summary: Alien ruleset: colours tied to nations?
Project: Freeciv
Submitted by: jtn
Submitted on: Tue Feb 19 23:33:10 2013
Category: rulesets
Priority: 1 - Later
Follow-up Comment #1, bug #20507 (project freeciv):
I think it's harmless. Certainly when I just tested civ2, I had no trouble
running into pirates.
The obvious way to fix it is to fork barbarian/pirate nations, the same way
all the other civ2 nations are forked. (Did civ2 even have pirates?)
Update of bug #20501 (project freeciv):
Status: Ready For Test = Fixed
Open/Closed:Open = Closed
Planned Release: 2.3.5,2.4.0,2.5.0 = 2.4.0,2.5.0
Update of patch #3717 (project freeciv):
Status: Ready For Test = Done
Open/Closed:Open = Closed
Planned Release: 2.3.5,2.4.0,2.5.0 = 2.4.0,2.5.0
Update of bug #20390 (project freeciv):
Status:None = Fixed
Assigned to:None = jorneg
Open/Closed:Open = Closed
Planned Release:
Update of bug #20236 (project freeciv):
Status:None = Need Info
___
Reply to this item at:
http://gna.org/bugs/?20236
___
Message sent
Follow-up Comment #6, bug #19868 (project freeciv):
Attached is a version of the patch updated to svn trunk revision 22384 and a
file containing the data it is based on.
Should a multi line comment end in a blank line ( * last linen */)? Should
comments I only change a part of be updated to the
Update of patch #3724 (project freeciv):
Status:None = Ready For Test
Assigned to:None = cazfi
___
Follow-up Comment #1:
That's something I
41 matches
Mail list logo
