Follow-up Comment #8, patch #4387 (project freeciv):
Just a quick note that I've tried to get fontconfig in crosser
(cross-compilation to windows) updated. While going through fontconfig mailing
lists to see if the problems I'm encountering are already reported, I notice
how all the Windows build
Follow-up Comment #11, bug #21115 (project freeciv):
For effect reqs nreqs, I think the plan now is:
S2_4: nreqs must be used, patch ruleset sanity checking to disallow negated =
TRUE reqs
2.6: nreqs are to be removed (or only deprecated?). present = FALSE reqs must
be used.
What about S2_5?
Update of bug #17887 (project freeciv):
Depends on: = patch #4399
___
Reply to this item at:
http://gna.org/bugs/?17887
___
Message sent
Update of bug #17887 (project freeciv):
Depends on: = patch #4397
___
Reply to this item at:
http://gna.org/bugs/?17887
___
Message sent
Update of bug #17887 (project freeciv):
Depends on: = bugs #21435
___
Reply to this item at:
http://gna.org/bugs/?17887
___
Message sent
Follow-up Comment #12, bug #21115 (project freeciv):
Oh, if we are still going to release 2.3.5, sanity check patch planned for
S2_4 should go to S2_3 too.
___
Reply to this item at:
http://gna.org/bugs/?21115
Follow-up Comment #3, bug #21414 (project freeciv):
It's a bit of a mess that roads use compatibility definitions
in ruleset (ROCO_xxx) while other specials are converted by
rule_name.
Former is introduced in 2.5, so it's not yet been in any
release nor is format yet frozen - maybe we should
Update of patch #4377 (project freeciv):
Status: Ready For Test = Done
Assigned to:None = cazfi
Open/Closed:Open = Closed
Follow-up Comment #2, bug #21416 (project freeciv):
Presumably because it predates the names being ruleset
defineable.
Let's add some history here in case it helps with some other issues:
1) Alien ruleset started off as copy from my stub ruleset
2) Both stub ruleset and alien ruleset (until
URL:
http://gna.org/patch/?4404
Summary: Copy specialists related ruleset comments from
classic to alien
Project: Freeciv
Submitted by: cazfi
Submitted on: Sat 04 Jan 2014 01:00:25 PM EET
Category: rulesets
URL:
http://gna.org/patch/?4405
Summary: Move automatic road/base messages (New hope sweeps
like fire...) to Lua script?
Project: Freeciv
Submitted by: jtn
Submitted on: Sat Jan 4 11:31:01 2014
Category: None
Follow-up Comment #3, bug #21416 (project freeciv):
It seems something has gone awry (human error most likely) when
some specialist related changes were made to ruleset
format/default ruleset
(This happened in patch #2050 for 2.3.0, if that helps.)
Follow-up Comment #2, patch #4392 (project freeciv):
Also, rather than implementing simple reveal-and-never-hide
feature, I think more general appear and disappear framework
that could model anything of revealing, hiding, depleting,
actual appearance and disappearance, growing, falling
Follow-up Comment #9, patch #4387 (project freeciv):
(Since we're discussing the XDG directory spec here) another thing that makes
me a bit uneasy about using that for Freeciv is that it mandates a default
fallback to a system-wide directory (under /etc/xdg) for config.
I'm not sure that's
Follow-up Comment #1, patch #4405 (project freeciv):
Don't know if it matters, but remember that it's not necessarily exactly new
tech made one new road generally possible. Even classic ruleset has Bridge
Building technology that doesn't allow *new* road types, but one to build
existing roads on
Follow-up Comment #3, patch #4392 (project freeciv):
This concern is specific to the cases where player knowledge is
kept incomplete.
Right. What I have had in mind system where the extras get actually created
when they should be made visible, rather than keeping them hidden from players
until
Follow-up Comment #4, patch #4392 (project freeciv):
I take it the difference between the two systems (property
that one player can know the extra and the other not) is
important to you?
Absolutely -- I think it's vital for certain rulesets involving strategic
resources.
You don't even know
Follow-up Comment #5, patch #4392 (project freeciv):
Civ III has it. It just that I always thought that it would be better if
resources were revealed to everybody when first one reached the required tech
- even if you don't know the tech details well enough to use it yourself,
there's some
Follow-up Comment #2, patch #4405 (project freeciv):
Don't know if it matters, but remember that it's not
necessarily exactly new tech made one new road generally
possible.
Indeed, it's not necessarily a tech that triggers it any more (although I
think that's all we'll handle at the moment?)
URL:
http://gna.org/bugs/?21436
Summary: Connect with rail can no longer build roads first
Project: Freeciv
Submitted by: jtn
Submitted on: Sat Jan 4 13:44:38 2014
Category: None
Severity: 3 - Normal
On 4 January 2014 15:29, Jacob Nevins no-reply.invalid-addr...@gna.org wrote:
I had not noticed that we'd got rid of free city bridges in the classic
ruleset by not having AlwaysOnCityCenter, although now I see it was discussed
extensively in patch #3522 and patch #3826. We should remember to
Follow-up Comment #1, bug #21436 (project freeciv):
This is presumably caused by gen-roads, and might be hard to
solve in general
I assume we will be able to re-use most of the code used to solve similar
problem on placing railroads from editor.
Update of bug #21427 (project freeciv):
Status:None = Ready For Test
Assigned to:None = jtn
___
Follow-up Comment #3:
Maybe this ticket
Follow-up Comment #2, bug #21403 (project freeciv):
Should it even be possible for units to remove AutoOnCityCenter extras?
Since they are liable to pop into existence when a new tech is discovered, I
tend to think they should not be removeable.
The distinction for me is that AlwaysOnCityCenter
Marko Lindqvist writes:
Follow-up Comment #1, bug #21428 (project freeciv):
[...] I've started designing Ruleset object deprecation -feature,
maybe making its debut in 3.0.
I've been thinking about this sort of thing too, so I'd be interested in
your ideas.
For instance, if advances in
URL:
http://gna.org/bugs/?21437
Summary: Autosettlers ignoring special resources (mining
hills without coal when coal is available)
Project: Freeciv
Submitted by: jtn
Submitted on: Sat Jan 4 16:27:24 2014
Category: None
Follow-up Comment #1, bug #21437 (project freeciv):
I'm not sure what useful diagnostics I can provide.
Savegame is enough for me to check myself, but with future autosettler
problems you may want to correlate which tiles city is currently working to
ones autosettler starts to improve (the
Follow-up Comment #2, bug #21437 (project freeciv):
The scenario editor lets us be a bit scientific with this. Savegame attached
where half the world is hills, the other half grass (so that there's something
to eat), and half of the hills within the city radius have coal.
After loading this, I
Follow-up Comment #3, bug #21437 (project freeciv):
you may want to correlate which tiles city is currently working
to ones autosettler starts to improve
Missed this in previous tests, but I just redid trunk, and city was only ever
working a grass tile; worker built road to it and then they
Follow-up Comment #4, bug #21437 (project freeciv):
btw. This is the first bug report ever where one should specify AI type used.
:-)
But I just assume you're using classic AI, and not threaded one, which does
this part a bit differently.
Follow-up Comment #5, bug #21437 (project freeciv):
btw. This is the first bug report ever where one should specify
AI type used. :-)
:)
FWIW, I do actually have threaded AI built in
(--enable-ai-static=classic,threaded), just because.
But when I start a game with aifill (unlike this one),
On 4 January 2014 16:15, Jacob Nevins
0jacobnk.fc...@chiark.greenend.org.uk wrote:
Marko Lindqvist writes:
Follow-up Comment #1, bug #21428 (project freeciv):
[...] I've started designing Ruleset object deprecation -feature,
maybe making its debut in 3.0.
I've been thinking about this sort
Follow-up Comment #6, bug #21437 (project freeciv):
How is it determined which AI is used for autosettlers? It
doesn't show up in /list players.
- new ticket?
Maybe /list players should show AI type associated to human players too, as
it affects advisors. AI type associated with player cannot
URL:
http://gna.org/patch/?4406
Summary: players_in_same_range() and other refactoring
Project: Freeciv
Submitted by: jtn
Submitted on: Sat Jan 4 19:13:44 2014
Category: None
Priority: 5 - Normal
Update of patch #4388 (project freeciv):
Depends on: = patch #4406
___
Reply to this item at:
http://gna.org/patch/?4388
___
Message sent
Update of patch #4388 (project freeciv):
Status:None = In Progress
Assigned to:None = jtn
Planned Release: = 2.6.0
Follow-up Comment #1, patch #4406 (project freeciv):
Invent new players_in_same_range() for use in the various
functions that look for player with some property within a
requirement range.
Sorry for leaving that out when implementing Alliance range. I considered it,
but then listened inner
URL:
http://gna.org/patch/?4407
Summary: Move requirement range/survives sanity checking from
req_from_str() to rssanity.c
Project: Freeciv
Submitted by: jtn
Submitted on: Sat Jan 4 19:24:19 2014
Category: None
Follow-up Comment #2, patch #4406 (project freeciv):
No problem :)
(I also considered a players_range_iterate() like city_range_iterate() in the
AI, but decided that was overdoing it.)
(file #19667)
___
Additional Item Attachment:
File
Follow-up Comment #1, patch #4388 (project freeciv):
Very early WIP. Not a commit candidate because:
* Untested
* Not written help yet because patch #4400 still WIP
* Not updated README.effects because patch #4401 still WIP
One notable decision: wrt bug #21415, I have decided to have the AI
Follow-up Comment #3, bug #21403 (project freeciv):
Should it even be possible for units to remove AutoOnCityCenter
extras?
1) Maybe it's semantics, but unlike with the ALWAYS -flag this should not be
hard rule.
2) It's actually right thing to do in some situations. It's *not* guaranteed
that
Follow-up Comment #13, bug #21115 (project freeciv):
S2_4: nreqs must be used, patch ruleset sanity checking to
disallow negated = TRUE reqs
Oh, if we are still going to release 2.3.5, sanity check patch
planned for S2_4 should go to S2_3 too.
Hm, I'm not wild about potentially disallowing
URL:
http://gna.org/patch/?4408
Summary: Check for AutoOnCityCenter extras in more
circumstances (not just gaining tech)
Project: Freeciv
Submitted by: jtn
Submitted on: Sat Jan 4 19:59:34 2014
Category: None
Follow-up Comment #1, patch #4408 (project freeciv):
...maybe Government too?
___
Reply to this item at:
http://gna.org/patch/?4408
___
Message sent via/by Gna!
http://gna.org/
Follow-up Comment #14, bug #21115 (project freeciv):
Hm, I'm not wild about potentially disallowing rulesets on
stable branches.
True, that would be quite blatantly against datafile format freeze.
log_error() (limited to one client popup even if there's multiple negated
reqs) sounds sensible -
Follow-up Comment #4, bug #21403 (project freeciv):
It's not guaranteed that the extra will pop up back, for
example if city has new owner who does not know required
tech to rebuild it
Good point -- in my world, the can-we-pillage test would have to include
would this extra currently be
Follow-up Comment #3, patch #4405 (project freeciv):
another plausible place we should be calling
upgrade_all_city_extras() is on building wonders
Now covered by patch #4408.
___
Reply to this item at:
http://gna.org/patch/?4405
URL:
http://gna.org/bugs/?21438
Summary: freeciv-manual -r rulesetdir option doesn't work
Project: Freeciv
Submitted by: jtn
Submitted on: Sat Jan 4 20:19:33 2014
Category: None
Severity: 2 - Minor
Follow-up Comment #15, bug #21115 (project freeciv):
Just to make sure we don't do duplicate work: have you done
any work to convert our rulesets?
No.
___
Reply to this item at:
http://gna.org/bugs/?21115
URL:
http://gna.org/bugs/?21439
Summary: diplomat can't bribe trireme
Project: Freeciv
Submitted by: None
Submitted on: sab 04 gen 2014 21:06:45 UTC
Category: None
Severity: 3 - Normal
URL:
http://gna.org/bugs/?21440
Summary: Unique achievements aren't unique in the event of a
tie?
Project: Freeciv
Submitted by: jtn
Submitted on: Sat Jan 4 21:11:46 2014
Category: None
Severity: 3 -
Follow-up Comment #1, bug #21439 (project freeciv):
I'll check the savegame later, but one should remember that even cargo of the
transport counts against the unit to be bribed must be alone in the tile
-rule, so the trireme may carry someone protecting it from bribing.
URL:
http://gna.org/bugs/?21441
Summary: Gained achievements not visible to client
Project: Freeciv
Submitted by: jtn
Submitted on: Sat Jan 4 21:15:00 2014
Category: None
Severity: 3 - Normal
URL:
http://gna.org/bugs/?21442
Summary: Client could report incomplete effect knowledge in
city dialog
Project: Freeciv
Submitted by: jtn
Submitted on: Sat Jan 4 21:19:46 2014
Category: client
Severity:
URL:
http://gna.org/patch/?4409
Summary: Script-defined achievements
Project: Freeciv
Submitted by: jtn
Submitted on: Sat Jan 4 21:33:10 2014
Category: None
Priority: 5 - Normal
Status:
Update of patch #4406 (project freeciv):
Status: In Progress = Ready For Test
___
Follow-up Comment #3:
After a bit of testing, I'm considering this ready to commit.
Follow-up Comment #3, patch #4011 (project freeciv):
I checked another time...
I added scripting lua (transform terrain -mountain- and place resource -gold-)
in the scenario. If I turn ocean, deep ocean or lake in mountains, there are
error messages. Same position, exactly on sanity_check().
If
Follow-up Comment #7, bug #17301 (project freeciv):
This is still bothering me. I'd like more rulesets to used foggedborders by
default, but I feel I can't recommend it due to the issue described here.
As an alternative to SEE_INSIDE, what would people think of a server option
where you always
Follow-up Comment #8, bug #21384 (project freeciv):
Postscript: cazfi actually spotted this problem nearly two years ago. From bug
#18588 comment 1:
I suspect that there's similar problem when tile owner is
removed from game. Remaining players may still have him as
owner of the tile in their
Update of bug #21440 (project freeciv):
Category:None = general
Status:None = In Progress
Assigned to:None = cazfi
Update of bug #21436 (project freeciv):
Category:None = client
Status:None = In Progress
Assigned to:None = cazfi
Follow-up Comment #4, bug #21427 (project freeciv):
How about this patch?
Approved.
___
Reply to this item at:
http://gna.org/bugs/?21427
___
Message sent via/by Gna!
http://gna.org/
Follow-up Comment #1, patch #4409 (project freeciv):
I've had the idea about requirement type Lua for years, where lua script
would be consulted if requirement is fullfilled or not.
It would be available for more things (all requirement ranges, for starters)
than having such req only via
Update of patch #4380 (project freeciv):
Status: Ready For Test = Done
Assigned to:None = cazfi
Open/Closed:Open = Closed
Update of patch #4381 (project freeciv):
Status: Ready For Test = Done
Assigned to:None = cazfi
Open/Closed:Open = Closed
URL:
http://gna.org/bugs/?21443
Summary: Empty global_init_techs not saved
Project: Freeciv
Submitted by: cazfi
Submitted on: Sun 05 Jan 2014 04:25:36 AM EET
Category: freeciv-ruledit
Severity: 3 - Normal
Update of patch #4385 (project freeciv):
Status: Ready For Test = Done
Assigned to:None = cazfi
Open/Closed:Open = Closed
Update of bug #21414 (project freeciv):
Category:None = general
Status: Ready For Test = Fixed
Open/Closed:Open = Closed
Update of bug #21439 (project freeciv):
Category:None = general
Status:None = Invalid
Assigned to:None = cazfi
Open/Closed:
On 4 January 2014 20:12, Marko Lindqvist cazf...@gmail.com wrote:
On 4 January 2014 16:15, Jacob Nevins
0jacobnk.fc...@chiark.greenend.org.uk wrote:
Marko Lindqvist writes:
Follow-up Comment #1, bug #21428 (project freeciv):
[...] I've started designing Ruleset object deprecation -feature,
Follow-up Comment #2, patch #4408 (project freeciv):
As with city range requirements, I would go to check once a turn model with
this.
1) Any kind of requirement gets checked, and at well-defined point (unlike
enabler itself not being checked, but getting noticed next time something
completely
Follow-up Comment #4, patch #4405 (project freeciv):
I had not noticed that we'd got rid of free city bridges in the
classic ruleset by not having AlwaysOnCityCenter, although now
I see it was discussed extensively in patch #3522 and
patch #3826. We should remember to put that in NEWS.
Follow-up Comment #2, bug #21436 (project freeciv):
might be hard to solve in general
Note, however, that updates to user interface have been minimal - full
potential of gen-roads and extras is not exposed to users. There's no such
thing as connect gen-road as there's only connect with
Update of bug #21440 (project freeciv):
Status: In Progress = Ready For Test
___
Follow-up Comment #1:
So far untested fix.
(file #19673)
___
Follow-up Comment #1, bug #21438 (project freeciv):
Printing curently selected rulesetdir (game.server.rulesetdir) in various
places shows that it changes from user requested one to classic in
game_init()
___
Reply to this item at:
Update of bug #21438 (project freeciv):
Category:None = general
Status:None = Ready For Test
Planned Release: = 2.3.5, 2.4.2, 2.5.0,
2.6.0
Update of patch #4402 (project freeciv):
Status:None = Ready For Test
Assigned to:None = cazfi
Planned Release: = 2.3.5, 2.4.2, 2.5.0,
2.6.0
Follow-up Comment #1, patch #4389 (project freeciv):
My vote would go to simply scanning ruleset loading time if there's any city
radius affecting effects in the ruleset. If there is, keep current behavior
(or calculate upper bound that all such effects together could have, no matter
if they can
Follow-up Comment #8, bug #17301 (project freeciv):
As an alternative to SEE_INSIDE, what would people think of a
server option where you always know where your own borders are,
but other players' are fogged?
That sounds like an improvement to current situation (unlike the SEE_INSIDE
Follow-up Comment #1, bug #21410 (project freeciv):
I couldn't conveniently set up a good test case
What about Railroad? There's connect with railroad (ROCO_RAIL) way to get
railroad building in to saved orders. If it's then considered OLD_ROAD, and
not OLD_RAIL, at the time of converting from
Update of bug #21382 (project freeciv):
Category: client-gtk-2.0 = client
Status:None = Ready For Test
Assigned to:None = cazfi
URL:
http://gna.org/patch/?4411
Summary: Convert supplied ruleset effects to use present =
FALSE instead of nreqs
Project: Freeciv
Submitted by: cazfi
Submitted on: Sun 05 Jan 2014 08:40:54 AM EET
Category: rulesets
Follow-up Comment #4, bug #20030 (project freeciv):
Unfortunately licensing issues prevent us from taking Temple of Artemis or
Mausoleum of Mausolos.
Attached patch is for Temple of Zeus. In addition to applying this, one should
copy the image as data/wonders/statue_of_zeus.png.
Inspection
83 matches
Mail list logo
