Update of patch #3332 (project freeciv):
Status:None = Wont Do
Open/Closed:Open = Closed
___
Follow-up Comment #6:
Closing as
Follow-up Comment #5, patch #3332 (project freeciv):
I agree with bug #20695 and I ask to close this patch, because it's pointless.
___
Reply to this item at:
http://gna.org/patch/?3332
___
Follow-up Comment #4, patch #3332 (project freeciv):
For completeness, although I am not in favor of nreqs{} support everywhere, I
prepared a patch with similar effect (and entirely different implementation)
as part of discussion in patch #3879. While I don't know I will be proposing
that for
Follow-up Comment #3, patch #3332 (project freeciv):
Is this still needed? Can one use the negated value in reqs{} vectors to
meet the original intent of this patch?
___
Reply to this item at:
http://gna.org/patch/?3332
URL:
http://gna.org/patch/?3332
Summary: Negated requirements_vector
Project: Freeciv
Submitted by: gorb
Submitted on: Mon 18 Jun 2012 06:41:10 PM GMT
Category: rulesets
Priority: 3 - Low
Follow-up Comment #1, patch #3332 (project freeciv):
I haven't checked the patch yet, but some comments:
- I'm for adding nreqs to at least some things provided it's not breaking AI
too much
- To get it compile you certainly have been forced to take care of most parts
of the code needing update.
Follow-up Comment #2, patch #3332 (project freeciv):
Could you provide examples why you want the nreqs for each object type?
Yes, I can, but only one object type: building, see patch #1341.
Base, cities, government, road, nation and specialist are useless. I waste my
time, but see gmake
