Freddie Witherden wrote:
Hi all,
On 31 Jan 2009, at 09:05, Dennis Schridde wrote:
Nope, not much holding back 2.2.
I would like to see the new lobby protocol which Gerard was working on
make it into 2.2. Will simplify things in the future.
I did slightly more work on it,
Hi,
On Thu, 19 Feb 2009 12:55:49 +0100, Gerard Krol
g.c.k...@student.tudelft.nl wrote:
I did slightly more work on it, and was not satisfied with the end
result. It just didn't feel right (oooh). I think we should completely
rewrite the joining/hosting code. Also, JSON is quite OK, but a way
2009/2/19 Freddie Witherden fred...@witherden.org:
Lua is fine with me -- so long as it is not too hard to parse on the Python
(server) side of things. The one advantage that JSON did have was that it
was possible to write an HTTP interface for the lobby server (using JSON)
allowing for
Am Samstag, 31. Januar 2009 07:50:10 schrieb bugs buggy:
On 1/5/09, Per Inge Mathisen per.mathi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 10:54 PM, bugs buggy buginato...@gmail.com wrote:
I was just curious, since the release of 2.1, what is the plan for the
next version?
I was
Hi all,
On 31 Jan 2009, at 09:05, Dennis Schridde wrote:
Nope, not much holding back 2.2.
I would like to see the new lobby protocol which Gerard was working on
make it into 2.2. Will simplify things in the future.
Other than that, the sooner we branch, the better!
Regards, Freddie.
On 1/5/09, Per Inge Mathisen per.mathi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 10:54 PM, bugs buggy buginato...@gmail.com wrote:
I was just curious, since the release of 2.1, what is the plan for the
next version?
I was thinking that 2.2 should be branched from trunk, and then we
