ÎÎÎ Fri, 24 Dec 2004 19:46:32 +0100,Î(Î) wolfgang mÃhlegger
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ÎÎÏÎÏÎ/wrote:
Phoebus Dokos schrieb:
Hmmm... I dunno... maybe a port of Doom? ;-) (With sufficient speed now
on the new version of QPC (3.30 - another plug ;-) ) that will be
possible in most colour enabled pla
John Hall wrote:
> How will 3.08 (and 3.09 if it remains QPC-only) be treated in the
> version history and change log?
The changes will be mentioned in the version history like with every
other release (as can already be seen on my page at
http://www.kilgus.net/qpc/versionssms.html), but probably
http://www.inet.hr/~sazivano/Move/Farting_Santas.htm
--
Paul Holmgren
2 57 300-C's in Indy
Hoosier Corps L#6
___
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Another quick note for images that anyone would like to use for an icon
in QDT. They need to have what I call hard edges. If you have an edge
that goes from black to white in steps, for example, since I have not
incorporated Marcel's alpha yet (coming later), if you put this kind of
image ont
On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 11:56:57 -, Dilwyn Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Once it's settled and everyone stops arguing about it, I'll see about
adding it to display_cde.
No comment on the code so I guess it will have to wait until the new year.
Seems straightforward enough, the only real dif
On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 17:47:14 +, Malcolm Cadman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
<>
Yes, absolutely... that's why I am going to play a nice game of QWord
:-P (PLLGG)
Great ! That is all settled then :-)
I wonder what game you have got planned next ... ?
It all depends on the encourageme
Phoebus Dokos schrieb:
Hmmm... I dunno... maybe a port of Doom? ;-) (With sufficient speed now
on the new version of QPC (3.30 - another plug ;-) ) that will be
possible in most colour enabled platforms (QXL excluded... Q40/60 were
already capable)
... and with a multiplayer over lan option :-
ÎÎÎ Fri, 24 Dec 2004 17:47:14 +,Î(Î) Malcolm Cadman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ÎÎÏÎÏÎ/wrote:
I wonder what game you have got planned next ... ?
Hmmm... I dunno... maybe a port of Doom? ;-) (With sufficient speed now on
the new version of QPC (3.30 - another plug ;-) ) that will be possible in
m
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Phoebus Dokos
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
Thu, 23 Dec 2004 20:07:31 +,() Malcolm Cadman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> /wrote:
Yet being a member of Quanta isn't that bad :-) ... a small
subscription a year helps to oils the wheels a bit.
Oh I understand, but
Tim
Why it says Copyright 1989 Quanta I don't know, in fact all the
reprints were dated 1989 as no one amended it.
The fact remains, copyright is with Jan Jones. If Quanta had bought
the copyright there would have been no need to make repeated payments
to Jan Jones.
In any case I feel this arg
On Thu, 23 Dec 2004, Timothy Swenson wrote:
> "Copyright 1989 Quanta"
>
> This is from the "Quanta Reprint Limited Edition" of July 1989. If Quanta
> does not own the copyright, then why did Quanta state that it does, in the
> book.
It's a copyright on a different thing to Jan Jones' copyright
11 matches
Mail list logo
