Eric S. Raymond wrote:
So, as a beginning, I'm proposing that savefiles should grow two new
fields: (1) A unique ID, and (2), a parent field containing the
ID of the immediately preceding savefile. For a root (start-of-campaign)
savefile the parent ID field would be blank or omitted.
What
On Sun, Feb 10, 2008 at 12:31 PM, Karol 'grzywacz' Nowak
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Eric S. Raymond wrote:
What if someone deletes a save from withing the sequence?
Why not store the history of save file IDs as a comma seperated list?
Deleted files wouldn't kill you, and you could still
On Friday 08 February 2008, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
Alexander Neundorf [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I noticed that you are discussing using CMake for Wesnoth (which would be
great), and since as far as I have seen you have open questions and
concerns regarding CMake, I'd like to help with that. I'm
John McNabb [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Why not store the history of save file IDs as a comma seperated list?
Deleted files wouldn't kill you, and you could still reconstruct the
whole tree.
That's a good idea.
--
a href=http://www.catb.org/~esr/;Eric S. Raymond/a
Karol 'grzywacz' Nowak [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Eric S. Raymond wrote:
So, as a beginning, I'm proposing that savefiles should grow two new
fields: (1) A unique ID, and (2), a parent field containing the
ID of the immediately preceding savefile. For a root (start-of-campaign)
savefile the
Alexander Neundorf [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I would even prefer if you ask before you decide for one or the other :-)
The blog you referenced consisted of mostly anchorless rants, which I already
replied to each of his points.
I'd happily discuss the issues which you consider weak points in cmake.
