On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 7:22 AM, bugs buggy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ok, lets do it.
Release 2.1 beta 5.
Release 2.2 alpha / beta 1.
Let them have a choice on which version they want to play.
I would think they would want 2.2 for the FMVs, and the improved path
finding, and they can play
bugs buggy schreef:
On 9/24/08, Giel van Schijndel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
bugs buggy schreef:
On 9/22/08, Freddie Witherden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is not a good use of developer time -- which could be better
spent on 2.2 -- ensuring that we never get into this situation again.
This
Per Inge Mathisen schreef:
Also, if we release something directly from trunk without creating a
release branch for it, I think we should not call it a beta. Let's
call it an alpha-1 release. (I do not think we want to maintain two
release branches at the moment.)
Actually I'd prefer not to
Am Donnerstag, 25. September 2008 10:35:27 schrieb Zarel:
2008/9/25 bugs buggy [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Ok, lets do it.
Release 2.1 beta 5.
Release 2.2 alpha / beta 1.
Let them have a choice on which version they want to play.
I would think they would want 2.2 for the FMVs, and the
On 9/25/08, Dennis Schridde [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am Donnerstag, 25. September 2008 10:35:27 schrieb Zarel:
2008/9/25 bugs buggy [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Ok, lets do it.
Release 2.1 beta 5.
Release 2.2 alpha / beta 1.
Let them have a choice on which version they want to play.
On 9/25/08, Per Inge Mathisen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 7:22 AM, bugs buggy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ok, lets do it.
Release 2.1 beta 5.
Release 2.2 alpha / beta 1.
Let them have a choice on which version they want to play.
I would think they would want 2.2
Am Donnerstag, 25. September 2008 19:24:01 schrieb bugs buggy:
On 9/25/08, Dennis Schridde [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am Donnerstag, 25. September 2008 10:35:27 schrieb Zarel:
2008/9/25 bugs buggy [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Ok, lets do it.
Release 2.1 beta 5.
Release 2.2 alpha / beta
On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 8:19 PM, Dennis Schridde [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Unmaintained in a way that bugfixing has no priority (yet).
I can't believe you are saying that. Bug fixing should *always* have priority!
Maybe I am starting to understand why we are in this mess now...
At least for
Am Donnerstag, 25. September 2008 21:36:49 schrieb Per Inge Mathisen:
On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 8:19 PM, Dennis Schridde [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Unmaintained in a way that bugfixing has no priority (yet).
I can't believe you are saying that. Bug fixing should *always* have
priority!
Maybe I
Per Inge Mathisen schreef:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 6:08 PM, Freddie Witherden
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I still think that SQLite is the way to go, so far as future proofing
goes. Going straight to tagfile makes it a lot harder to go to SQLite
later on (two converters needed etc.). The
bugs buggy schreef:
On 9/22/08, Freddie Witherden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is not a good use of developer time -- which could be better
spent on 2.2 -- ensuring that we never get into this situation again.
This about sums it up.
Developer time is short, so we need to do what will be
Hi Giel,
On 24 Sep 2008, at 23:52, Giel van Schijndel wrote:
Not supporting trunk savegames with 2.1_beta5 should IMO be *no*
problem
(i.e. no need to have forward compatibility). As for 2.1_beta4
savegames, what's the worst that could happen? People not upgrading to
2.1_beta5 (and
On 9/24/08, Giel van Schijndel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
bugs buggy schreef:
On 9/22/08, Freddie Witherden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is not a good use of developer time -- which could be better
spent on 2.2 -- ensuring that we never get into this situation again.
This about sums it
On 9/24/08, Giel van Schijndel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IMO releasing 2.1 would only offer people a choice, and as long as we're
clear on what we won't support I don't think we should face any serious
trouble from 2.1.
Ok, lets do it.
Release 2.1 beta 5.
Release 2.2 alpha / beta 1.
Let
Am Montag, 22. September 2008 04:32:13 schrieb bugs buggy:
While this has been discussed before, I feel that we need more input from
everyone, so I created a poll to see what the community thinks is the best
course of action.
This concerns if we should do a 2.1 beta 5, or skip 2.1 beta 5, and
Hi Dennis/Buggy
On 22 Sep 2008, at 09:27, Dennis Schridde wrote:
Am Montag, 22. September 2008 04:32:13 schrieb bugs buggy:
While this has been discussed before, I feel that we need more
input from
everyone, so I created a poll to see what the community thinks is
the best
course of
Am Montag, 22. September 2008 10:51:15 schrieb Freddie Witherden:
Hi Dennis/Buggy
On 22 Sep 2008, at 09:27, Dennis Schridde wrote:
Am Montag, 22. September 2008 04:32:13 schrieb bugs buggy:
While this has been discussed before, I feel that we need more
input from
everyone, so I created
Hi Dennis,
On 22 Sep 2008, at 13:06, Dennis Schridde wrote:
Try playing 2.1_beta4, it is quite poor so far as releases go.
2.1_beta5 is not going to go down well with people either if we break
their save games (will probably cause them not to upgrade).
That reminds me that we need some way to
Am Montag, 22. September 2008 15:29:09 schrieb Freddie Witherden:
Hi Dennis,
Hello Fred!
On 22 Sep 2008, at 13:06, Dennis Schridde wrote:
Try playing 2.1_beta4, it is quite poor so far as releases go.
2.1_beta5 is not going to go down well with people either if we break
their save games
On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 5:24 PM, Dennis Schridde [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How far are the tagfile and database ideas? Any progress there? I know the
tagfiles basically seem got stuck after the early phase of implementing the
framework functions...
There is a separate tagfile branch, which is
Hey Dennis,
On 22 Sep 2008, at 16:24, Dennis Schridde wrote:
Am Montag, 22. September 2008 15:29:09 schrieb Freddie Witherden:
Hi Dennis,
Hello Fred!
On 22 Sep 2008, at 13:06, Dennis Schridde wrote:
Try playing 2.1_beta4, it is quite poor so far as releases go.
2.1_beta5 is not going to
On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 6:08 PM, Freddie Witherden
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I still think that SQLite is the way to go, so far as future proofing
goes. Going straight to tagfile makes it a lot harder to go to SQLite
later on (two converters needed etc.). The advantages of a database
are also
On 9/22/08, Dennis Schridde [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am Montag, 22. September 2008 04:32:13 schrieb bugs buggy:
While this has been discussed before, I feel that we need more input from
everyone, so I created a poll to see what the community thinks is the
best
course of action.
This
On 9/22/08, Freddie Witherden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hey Dennis,
On 22 Sep 2008, at 16:24, Dennis Schridde wrote:
Am Montag, 22. September 2008 15:29:09 schrieb Freddie Witherden:
Speaking of conversion: The only thing that makes =2.1_beta4 games
not load in
2.1_beta4 is that the
Am Montag, 22. September 2008 18:40:02 schrieb Per Inge Mathisen:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 6:08 PM, Freddie Witherden
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I still think that SQLite is the way to go, so far as future proofing
goes. Going straight to tagfile makes it a lot harder to go to SQLite
later
Am Montag, 22. September 2008 18:41:04 schrieb bugs buggy:
On 9/22/08, Dennis Schridde [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am Montag, 22. September 2008 04:32:13 schrieb bugs buggy:
We cannot release 2.2 just now. You are giving a wrong impression to the
community...
I *will* be full of bugs,
On 9/22/08, Dennis Schridde [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am Montag, 22. September 2008 18:41:04 schrieb bugs buggy:
On 9/22/08, Dennis Schridde [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am Montag, 22. September 2008 04:32:13 schrieb bugs buggy:
We cannot release 2.2 just now. You are giving a wrong
27 matches
Mail list logo
