On Thursday, 16 February 2012 at 8:42, Per Inge Mathisen wrote:
A script should not get a warning for every event it does not
implement. If you want to warn about misnamed timers, this function
needs an additional bool parameter that is not set for events. If you
want to warn about misnamed
On Friday, 27 January 2012 at 22:36, buginator wrote:
Need some clarification on the release strategy.
Namely:
3.1 goes into the beta cycle this weekend with the first build.
Do we have everything for 3.1-beta1 now? Then I'll do that tomorrow.
3.1.x will be for bug fixes only.
3.2 will
On Monday, 23 January 2012 at 21:04, buginator wrote:
Eh ? where did this come from, I see no mail from dak180 anyplace, so
no idea what the context of this was.
Seems they get eaten by the mailing list. So what now? A new gna list,
where we hope that'll not start eating things? A google
- Forwarded message from dak180 dak...@users.sourceforge.net -
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2012 13:39:34 -0500
From: dak180 dak...@users.sourceforge.net
To: Development list warzone-dev@gna.org, Christian Ohm chr@gmx.net
Subject: Re: [warzone2100-dev] The dirt trail to 3.1
On 2012/01/20, at 12
On Monday, 23 January 2012 at 21:04, buginator wrote:
- Possibly wait for the official sdl 1.2.15.
http://www.libsdl.org/download-1.2.php
It is out.
Good. The mingw-cross-env on the server is updated.
Maybe we don't have to wait for that...
- Then branch 3.1, and do a beta1 release
Seems they get eaten by the mailing list. So what now? A new gna list,
where we hope that'll not start eating things? A google group? A sf list
(mirrored to a google group for usable archive)?
Oh, and dak180 also mentioned a list with archives running on our
server, but that seems too much
So, ehm, do we have a plan for 3.1? From my suggestion:
- Scrap the current 3.0.
- Update mingw-cross-env to sdl 1.2.15.
- Integrate quesoglc.
- Make a new 201201xx snapshot.
- Possibly fix stuff.
We are currently here. Is the template/hq stuff now fixed in git (or
could it be done in the
On Friday, 20 January 2012 at 13:39, dak180 wrote:
I would prefer to wait for that for three reasons:
I don't think it's necessary for a beta, if we get to that before the
SDL release, and any rc/final will be after that anyway.
___
Warzone-dev
Did someone mess with the server? The buildbot worked yesterday, and I
don't see any changes in the repo that would cause this.
- Forwarded message from build...@wz2100.net -
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 00:33:38 +0100
From: build...@wz2100.net
To: chr@gmx.net
Subject: buildbot failure in
On Monday, 9 January 2012 at 19:04, dak180 wrote:
The only thing I can think of is that SDL 1.2.15 is in prerelease and
due to become final in a week; someone could have tried to update it,
I know vexed was talking about it.
I've already installed that some days ago, that's not the problem.
Why do the generated files have to be in git?
On Thursday, 5 January 2012 at 7:48, nore...@github.com wrote:
Branch: refs/heads/master
Home: https://github.com/Warzone2100/warzone2100
Commit: 932d45244dd74dc61a208cf738be2b78e8a3b035
https://github.com/cybersphinx/warzone2100/commits/master builds both
versions (if the needed stuff is available). That results in
src/warzone2100qt and src/warzone2100sdl, and possibly leaves an old
src/warzone2100 around to confuse people. Do we want to make one of the
new ones take over that
https://github.com/cybersphinx/warzone2100/commits/master
Hm, looks like that doesn't build from a clean tree, sorry. Stupid
automake.
___
Warzone-dev mailing list
Warzone-dev@gna.org
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
- Forwarded message from build...@wz2100.net -
Build status: FAILURE
Buildslave for this Build: *bot-fast-amd64-1*
Complete logs for all build
steps: http://buildbot.wz2100.net/builders/master-nightly/builds/422
http://buildbot.wz2100.net/builders/master-nightly/builds/422
Build
On Thursday, 29 September 2011 at 20:39, mikej...@comcast.net wrote:
I tried to build it with mingw but got the following error. Any ideas?
C:/test/wz/devpkg/lib/libz.a(inflate.o):inflate.c:(.text+0xa0): multiple
definition of `inflatePrime'
On Thursday, 22 September 2011 at 22:57, buginator wrote:
Forum member Ezio has re-encoded the video files.
The thread is located here: http://forums.wz2100.net/viewtopic.php?f=6t=7796
They have done:
480pv3 4:3 919 MB
and
720p 4:3 1.04 GB
Right now, we have low quality and standard
Seeing someone complain about the lobby being down and restarting it, I
had a look a the logs. They're full of
2011-08-24 16:24:14+0200 [twisted.internet.protocol.ServerFactory] Could not
accept new connection (EMFILE)
which seems to indicate it can't open any more files, probably because
it
- Forwarded message from Stephen Kitt st...@sk2.org -
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2011 15:34:47 +0200
From: Stephen Kitt st...@sk2.org
To: Christian Ohm chr@gmx.net
Subject: warzone2100 and libiberty with mingw-w64
Hi,
You requested that I ship libiberty in the gcc-mingw-w64 packages,
since
On Saturday, 9 July 2011 at 12:21, buginator wrote:
Note, it seems that the license for this stuff is Apache 2, and that
doesn't mesh well with our license, so, I believe, that we can't have
this in our repo.
It doesn't look like having static or dynamic version of this changes
anything
--
A rock store eventually closed down; they were taking too much for granite.
___
Warzone-dev mailing list
Warzone-dev@gna.org
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
On Sunday, 8 May 2011 at 18:20, Kreuvf wrote:
08.05.2011 15:41, Per Inge Mathisen wrote:
[General]
name = Basic Tutorial
Difficulty = Easy
Map = data/base/wrf/tutorial/newtut.gam
Script = script/tutorial/tutorial.js
Data = data/base/wrf/tutorial/newtut.wrf
Is the name translatable?
Updated the milestone. Barring objections, I intend to push all that the next
days (except the docs, that needs to be integrated into the build system etc.).
___
Warzone-dev mailing list
Warzone-dev@gna.org
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
On Saturday, 30 April 2011 at 16:01, Guangcong Luo wrote:
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 3:34 PM, Rene jochum rene.joc...@pc-dummy.net wrote:
Can you setup a Test-mod for that?
Would be great if we can test this first.
It's a bit late to do balance testing for 2.3.8 at this stage. Knowing
Not
On Friday, 29 April 2011 at 10:20, Kreuvf wrote:
I'd like to update the German translation for 2.3.8, hopefully I have time for
it this weekend. If not, go without an updated translation.
For 2.3 that's only three strings, master has about 120 untranslated/fuzzy.
No other changes that should
Since Fastdeath made the Milestone field in trac unchangeable by normal users,
we can actually use it now to track release progress, without every new ticket
getting in the way. I've set http://developer.wz2100.net/ticket/2386 to 2.3.8
now, are there other problems that need to be solved for that?
On Wednesday, 27 April 2011 at 9:53, Kreuvf wrote:
26.04.2011 22:10, Christian Ohm wrote:
I'd like to see a move towards a process that doesn't result in countless
started things that need to be finished before we can even begin to think
about
a release.
But isn't this one
On Wednesday, 27 April 2011 at 20:54, Fastdeath wrote:
What I do not quite understand:
(Generally, merges go only in one direction,
no back-merges from master into other branches.)
that means we are not allowed to back merge branch unrelated bugfixes?
That means that you don't
On Sunday, 24 April 2011 at 21:28, Daniel Kliman wrote:
It sounds like the development model described in
http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/
Mostly it is influenced by the Linux kernel development process (arguably the
group of users most familiar with git).
Is that what
On Sunday, 24 April 2011 at 18:55, Per Inge Mathisen wrote:
On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 12:43 PM, Christian Ohm chr@gmx.net wrote:
I've wondered if the concept of stable release is actually useful for us.
It is useful for users.
Hm, that was supposed to read stable release branch. We bare can
On Tuesday, 26 April 2011 at 16:31, dak180 wrote:
I have yet to see a clear illustration of how the kernel development is
managed can you point to what you would consider to be the best such?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_kernel#Development_model for a summary,
On Tuesday, 26 April 2011 at 23:05, Per Inge Mathisen wrote:
I still remember lua branch, qt branch, netsync branch, and terrain
branch that festered like bad wounds while we struggled with lack of
testing and little idea what to do with them until they were merged
more or less untested (less
On Sunday, 24 April 2011 at 10:04, Per Inge Mathisen wrote:
This will have some consequences, like not being able to aim for a
stable release from master in a while,
I've wondered if the concept of stable release is actually useful for us.
Looking at 2.3, it seems to languish mostly, while
On Thursday, 17 March 2011 at 20:38, buginator wrote:
Pabs3 mentioned that we should remove all embedded 3rd party libs, and
I am OK with this.
This would mean we remove glee from source, as well as miniupnp.
I think the iniparser stuff is custom, though I am not 100% sure.
Objections ?
On Monday, 28 February 2011 at 19:55, Safety0ff wrote:
The precompiled version of physfs should be removed from the tarball
(I've set things such that the Physfs 2 build overwrites the files
from the tarball for the time being).
As mentioned on IRC, we either need to add a tarball without
On Thursday, 24 February 2011 at 0:00, Gilles J. Seguin wrote:
typo correction tirreur - tireur
Applied, thanks. Please attach the whole po file in the future though, that
makes applying it easier.
fr.po.diif is svn diff fr.po in trunk
Looks like you're still using the old svn repo, our
On Saturday, 15 January 2011 at 1:18, Safety0ff wrote:
Hi all,
While working on a CMake build system I took the opportunity to move
the contents from lib to src.
I don't see what that gains us, to me it'll only lead to confusion between old
and new layout and breaking of existing
- Forwarded message from softw...@heise.de -
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2010 18:24:08 +0100
From: softw...@heise.de
Subject: Your software is now being hosted
Dear software manufacturer,
your software Warzone 2100 is listed in the heise software directory at
- Forwarded message from mano...@users.sourceforge.net -
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 15:53:18 +
From: mano...@users.sourceforge.net
To: the_cybersph...@users.sourceforge.net
Subject: Help Wanted - Mac developer needed for W
Hello there,
I am just finished my studies about computer systems
The git repo on gitorious doesn't have all the history from svn, which makes it
somewhat painful to retrace old changes. My local git-svn repo was way better
in that regard. Is there a way to redo the repo from svn, doctor the transition
from old to new svn (berlios to gna) to give continuous
On Wednesday, 3 November 2010 at 12:46, dak180 wrote:
This is git, (so in keeping with git=MacGyver) there is a way (perhaps even
more than one); the real question is what is the cost of doing so and is the
outcome worth that cost?
If it's possible, I'll do the doctoring, so the cost is
On Monday, 11 October 2010 at 9:27, Per Inge Mathisen wrote:
I was told by Zarel and cybersphinx earlier that you absolutely needed
resolution changing before qt-branch could be merged, and now that
I've started working on it, you tell me you do not want it anyway?
On Tuesday, 14 September 2010 at 11:31, Giel van Schijndel wrote:
On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 12:56:53AM -0400, buginator wrote:
On 9/13/10, Christian Ohm wrote:
So how long would this bugfix 2.3 live? Until 2.5 is done, and then
2.4 is fixes only? By what criteria will the jump to 2.5 happen
On Sunday, 12 September 2010 at 22:24, buginator wrote:
On 9/12/10, Christian Ohm wrote:
The way I'd do 2.3 releases is:
0. Make Fastdeath's server build daily SVN snapshot builds, so hopefully
the
changes in current SVN get a bit more exposure before being in a RC.
1
On Sunday, 12 September 2010 at 14:12, Stephen Swaney wrote:
Two commit messages - compare and contrast:
Log Message:
---
Fix bug #2147, fix bug #2158, remove VTOL Flak Cannon (doesn't make sense
lore-wise, and did too much friendly fire to be useful).
That doesn't tell much about
The way I'd do 2.3 releases is:
0. Make Fastdeath's server build daily SVN snapshot builds, so hopefully the
changes in current SVN get a bit more exposure before being in a RC.
1. Branch a release branch off from 2.3 (either abusing a tag, or making a
separate branch and tag from that),
On Friday, 3 September 2010 at 14:37, Guangcong Luo wrote:
On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 2:24 PM, Christian Ohm chr@gmx.net wrote:
Do you know the difference between open source and commercial software?
Commercial software has to make users happy, because they pay the
developers.
Open
On Thursday, 2 September 2010 at 5:40, bugina...@users.sourceforge.net wrote:
Revision: 11573
http://warzone2100.svn.sourceforge.net/warzone2100/?rev=11573view=rev
Author: buginator
Date: 2010-09-02 05:40:10 + (Thu, 02 Sep 2010)
Log Message:
---
Trap player
On Monday, 23 August 2010 at 2:28, bugina...@users.sourceforge.net wrote:
Revision: 11525
http://warzone2100.svn.sourceforge.net/warzone2100/?rev=11525view=rev
Author: buginator
Date: 2010-08-23 02:28:59 + (Mon, 23 Aug 2010)
Log Message:
---
Remove the
On Tuesday, 17 August 2010 at 7:59, Per Inge Mathisen wrote:
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 6:19 AM, bugina...@users.sourceforge.net wrote:
Add a banned IP list to the game. All people that are kicked will be
entered into the file.
People using the same IP can *never* enter the game again.
On Thursday, 12 August 2010 at 19:51, Christian Ohm wrote:
Now we just need someone to be your underling, to see how it works (maybe I'll
add another test account for that). I'm not sure how access works, I hope the
coordinator can add people, then review their translations and commit them
On Thursday, 12 August 2010 at 19:09, Kreuvf wrote:
So, since you already started that experiment, let's go and see where that
leads
us. First thing: The FAQ misses yet another question (or it's just me not
asking
_frequently_ asked questions): With transifex in place can you still edit po
On Thursday, 12 August 2010 at 17:53, kre...@users.sourceforge.net wrote:
Updated German translation (+ transifex test to see how it's reacting when
changing the po in the repository)
The FAQ says they update twice a day, and I at least have an update button to
do it manually.
On Wednesday, 11 August 2010 at 20:23, Kreuvf wrote:
Who is transifex?
Why does transifex have commit access?
More questions:
Why do we need this?
Because all talk about a private Pootle (or similar) installation fell on deaf
ears.
Hasn't the benevolent dictator model worked out well?
On Wednesday, 11 August 2010 at 21:18, Kreuvf wrote:
And please don't get me wrong: I am deeply convinced that translations can
only
be good (aka consistent) as long as there is one maintainer. I've already been
through this everybody can edit translations like stupid shit at Launchpad
I don't know who put the release date for 2.3.4 in trac to the end of this
month - I intend to release it soon, since the burn damage bug is quite severe
imo (possibly making the campaign unplayable or at least way more difficult).
Objections to tagging later today, release tomorrow?
On Tuesday, 10 August 2010 at 14:28, Per Inge Mathisen wrote:
No objections. Perhaps throw in/improve some new maps, if there is
time? We could ask if anyone on the forum/irc could add basic/advanced
start bases to battle, mischief, cockpit and cockate maps, and
include/fix those.
Well, I
Zn Tuesday, 10 August 2010 at 15:06, Christian Ohm wrote:
Though I just remembered that Dydo changed his challenges to use not included
maps again (GPLv3, can be downloaded at
http://www.obooma.net/dydo/?page_id=935)...
Hm, and looking at the maps, they do have some water transition tiles
On Friday, 23 July 2010 at 15:05, buginator wrote:
On 7/22/10, Christian Ohm wrote:
Fine by me, probably. As you might have noticed, I've updated the Debian
packaging so we can offer .debs, let's see how much feedback that gets.
We would then make both tarballs and .debs ?
Isn't
On Friday, 23 July 2010 at 14:45, Guangcong Luo wrote:
And really zero disadvantages.
Except that it'll complicate the code a bit more if we have to look for two
extra files.
___
Warzone-dev mailing list
Warzone-dev@gna.org
On Friday, 23 July 2010 at 22:10, Rene jochum wrote:
There's another disadvantage, users have to findout theier version
and rename it, except if you do that in code.
Well, I said two extra files, that would search for the new files in addition
to the old one. Removing the old name seems like a
On Friday, 23 July 2010 at 22:14, Fastdeath wrote:
Would be nice to have packages for different architectures/versions.
As example:
1.) Debian Lenny
2.) Debian Etch
3.) Ubuntu Lucid
4.) Ubuntu Karmic
Etch? That seems quite old to me... But I think a package built
On Thursday, 22 July 2010 at 15:23, buginator wrote:
Using SF trac, I have come up with these changes so far, I think we
should try for a 2.3.2 release this weekend.
Fine by me, probably. As you might have noticed, I've updated the Debian
packaging so we can offer .debs, let's see how much
On Saturday, 3 July 2010 at 11:54, Kreuvf wrote:
Cyp wrote:
Maybe it would help if the c → cpp conversion was in a separate commit
than the rest of the changes?
Although it would help, that would make the commit non-atomic and we don't
want
to do this, right?
If the old file compiles as
On Saturday, 19 June 2010 at 21:53, buginator wrote:
For the Qt branch, the only (known) blockers are:
1) No CC builds so we can't test anything our usual way.
2) The lack of full screen resolution switching.
3) Not really a blocker per se, but quesoGLC is back, in case you
haven't noticed,
On Tuesday, 22 June 2010 at 19:57, buginator wrote:
Currently, I was assuming that 2.3 was feature locked, and we would
only be doing bug fixes.
However, it has been expressed that the branch shouldn't be feature locked.
I especially expressed that it shouldn't be bug fix only, since that
On Tuesday, 15 June 2010 at 14:10, the_cybersph...@users.sourceforge.net wrote:
Revision: 10971
http://warzone2100.svn.sourceforge.net/warzone2100/?rev=10971view=rev
Author: the_cybersphinx
Date: 2010-06-15 14:10:32 + (Tue, 15 Jun 2010)
Log Message:
---
On Saturday, 12 June 2010 at 16:03, Kreuvf wrote:
Reason 1: Download size will increase. And don't tell me this is not an issue.
For those doing releases, upload size increases as well, and I usually upload
both source and Windows build. So I'm also against including more music in the
base game,
Is there any reason not to release 2.3.1 this weekend? The power problem seems
at least better than before, I couldn't reproduce the last report (give power
to ally).
___
Warzone-dev mailing list
Warzone-dev@gna.org
I've made a wiki page describing where to find files on the different systems:
http://developer.wz2100.net/wiki/FileLocations. Additions and improvements
welcome.
Also, can we link to http://developer.wz2100.net/wiki/BugReporting from the
new ticket page?
BlueMaxima said mods on Windows go into the program folder, not the config
folder. Why?
___
Warzone-dev mailing list
Warzone-dev@gna.org
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
On Thursday, 10 June 2010 at 22:58, Per Inge Mathisen wrote:
Liked, and at least one other person recommended it: Battle (2p), Pass
Assault (2p), mischief (8p), Startup2 (2p, might replace existing
Startup). I think we can include any or all of these.
Hm, Pass Assault seems to originate from
Since noone else proposed any maps, suggestions by just looking at the preview
(all from the addons page):
2 player:
Arena #22, Battle, Stripmine
4 player:
Arena #14 (for Dydo-AI), Garond Valley, Spiral Mountain
8 player:
Hamilcar, Mischief
___
On Thursday, 3 June 2010 at 8:50, Kreuvf wrote:
Christian Ohm wrote:
The question is what to do with the lossless version we need as source,
where
should that go? SF? SVN? Somewhere else? Are the other music tracks already
somewhere in a lossless format?
Yes, they are:
http
Pabs3 said on IRC that he doesn't see any problems with including the extra
track from the Playstation version, so I intend to commit that soon. Relevant
IRC log:
[10:21] Zarel pabs3:
http://developer.wz2100.net/browser/trunk/COPYING.README
[10:22] Zarel Would you say this includes
On Monday, 24 May 2010 at 21:34, Christian Ohm wrote:
Two problems I've noticed:
1. Video playback is very jerky (SDL is smooth). I got the impression it is
worse for the first video when several are played (view intro for example, or
the campaign start), but maybe it's just more noticeable
On Wednesday, 19 May 2010 at 18:16, Ben wrote:
Just thought I could get your opinions on how I could change this for
the better. Zarel; you have your better screenshots, none of that :P
Here you go:
First, personally I don't like hardcoded HTML tables and stuff, I'd prefer some
light markup
How about releasing 2.3.1 soon? There have been quite a few commits since
2.3.0, arguably the most important being Dydo-AI's license. Anything that still
needs to be done for a release?
___
Warzone-dev mailing list
Warzone-dev@gna.org
On Tuesday, 18 May 2010 at 21:48, Per Inge Mathisen wrote:
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 9:07 PM, Christian Ohm chr@gmx.net wrote:
How about releasing 2.3.1 soon? There have been quite a few commits since
2.3.0, arguably the most important being Dydo-AI's license.
If that is the most
On Friday, 14 May 2010 at 19:24, Kreuvf wrote:
Is there the possibility to follow commits in a similarly comfortable fashion
as
is currently done with SVN with the new repositories (be it Hg, git, Bzr or
whatever)?
I guess once we actually use another repo for actual development we'll set up
Since there seems to be no winner in the RCS discussion, we have basically two
choices: 1. stay with SVN, 2. Decide on one of them (as backend at least). From
what I've read, it seems it is easily possible to access a git repository with
both hg and bzr. So I've set up a git repo for testing.
On Thursday, 29 April 2010 at 22:45, buginator wrote:
After some more tinkering with the code, I finally found the issue
that MSVC was having. In short, a bool in c is a int, and in c++ a
bool !=int. It was always returning 256 on false, and -858993663 on
true. For those that don't see
On Wednesday, 28 April 2010 at 18:34, NoName wrote:
I do still vote for Mercurial.
How about accessing a git repo with hg?
http://candidcode.com/2010/01/12/a-guide-to-converting-from-mercurial-hg-to-git-on-a-windows-client/
___
Warzone-dev mailing
On Wednesday, 28 April 2010 at 8:58, Per Inge Mathisen wrote:
Ok, sorry about the really bad pun. The point is, I think it is about
time to leave the barren wastes of svn behind, and head for the
promised lands of git. I've been looking into the newline issues, and
I am convinced that they
On Tuesday, 27 April 2010 at 20:06, kre...@users.sourceforge.net wrote:
Updated German translation, fixed some mistakes (mainly typos) I found during
the review of my last commit of 2.3/de.po
Why commas after the month in dates? Is that correct in German?
On Monday, 26 April 2010 at 12:18, Gilles J. Seguin wrote:
wrong, try
# cp GLee.h /usr/include/GL
# cp libGLee.a /usr/lib64
# ./configure
Hm, looking at the GLee source package, the pkg-config file seems to be a
Debian addition. Guess we need to add a manual detection for other systems...
On Sunday, 25 April 2010 at 14:58, Paul Wise wrote:
Also the embedded miniupnpc and iniparser copies are missing their LICENSE
files. For iniparser, this is a license violation. For miniupnpc it is less
of an issue because some of the files contain a copy of the license.
For miniupnpc, I've
On Sunday, 25 April 2010 at 21:52, Paul Wise wrote:
The latest version (1.4) does include one. Which version did you
include?
http://developer.wz2100.net/browser/tags/2.3.0/lib/netplay/miniupnpc says the
license file is included, but maybe it's missing from the tarball.
On Sunday, 25 April 2010 at 11:34, Gilles J. Seguin wrote:
#: src/multijoin.c:228
#, c-format
msgid File transfer has been aborted for %d.
-msgstr
+msgstr File transfer has been aborted for %d.
#: src/multilimit.c:316
msgid Limits reset to default values
-msgstr
+msgstr Limits
On Sunday, 25 April 2010 at 12:11, Gilles J. Seguin wrote:
- create --enable-system-GLee option to used system GLee library
and header
What's wrong with the current way? When GLee is installed on the system, it
uses that, else the integrated copy.
- new macro MZ_HAVE_GLEE to select between
New one:
http://developer.wz2100.net/changeset/10694
Tested by pabs3, and I guess he'll include it in the Debian package if we don't
commit it.
___
Warzone-dev mailing list
Warzone-dev@gna.org
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
On Saturday, 17 April 2010 at 15:31, Per Inge Mathisen wrote:
On Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 3:11 PM, dydo...@users.sourceforge.net wrote:
maps for dydo challenges
Added Paths:
---
branches/2.3/data/mods/multiplay/dydo-ai/maps/
On Saturday, 17 April 2010 at 15:31, Per Inge Mathisen wrote:
On Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 3:11 PM, dydo...@users.sourceforge.net wrote:
maps for dydo challenges
branches/2.3/data/mods/multiplay/dydo-ai/maps/4c-AllEqual.wz
branches/2.3/data/mods/multiplay/dydo-ai/maps/4c-Arena_14.wz
On Saturday, 17 April 2010 at 15:45, buginator wrote:
Let's try this again, 2.3 is in a code freeze, and ONLY show stopping
bugs will be fixed.
It was suggested that we branch 2.3.0 from svn head, once we know the
status of the Dydo changes.
Actually, I'd branch 2.3.0 from the rc tag as
On Saturday, 17 April 2010 at 20:24, buginator wrote:
So far, the list is:
http://linuxgames.com/
http://happypenguin.org/
http://linux-gamers.net/
http://freshmeat.net/projects/warzone2100/
We could also announce the RC on those sites, to get it a bit more exposed
(though we'd need at least
On Tuesday, 13 April 2010 at 22:14, buginator wrote:
Barring any other showstopping bugs, or objections, I think we should
tag 2.3 RC1a late Friday night or early Saturday morning to get this
out to as many of our current testers as possible before they start
their weekend gaming sessions.
On Tuesday, 13 April 2010 at 22:14, buginator wrote:
Barring any other showstopping bugs, or objections, I think we should
tag 2.3 RC1a late Friday night or early Saturday morning to get this
out to as many of our current testers as possible before they start
their weekend gaming sessions.
On Thursday, 8 April 2010 at 23:36, Per Inge Mathisen wrote:
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 3:03 PM, Christian Ohm chr@gmx.net wrote:
But it still breaks loading new saves in older versions?
Why do we need that?
To see if a campaign problem also happens in older versions? But if that is
already
On Wednesday, 7 April 2010 at 18:54, Guangcong Luo wrote:
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 6:22 PM, Christian Ohm chr@gmx.net wrote:
In this case... Well, looking at the patch, you increase the savegame
version.
Does that break campaign saves (I'd guess it would, if it works for campaign
mods
On Wednesday, 7 April 2010 at 14:25, Guangcong Luo wrote:
There's been a lot of drama surrounding what should and shouldn't be
committed to 2.3-branch. The things we are postponing to 2.3.1 are
things that deserve testing, and I believe the sooner we get them
tested, the better.
I think
On Wednesday, 7 April 2010 at 13:59, Guangcong Luo wrote:
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 11:46 AM, Per Inge Mathisen per.mathi...@gmail.com
wrote:
I do not like how this kind of heated rhetoric appears again and again
every time we try to say no to a change you want pushed into a release
1 - 100 of 315 matches
Mail list logo
