Freddie Witherden schreef: > On 22 Sep 2008, at 16:24, Dennis Schridde 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... > > Not too far along, they would both require weeks of work.
SQLite would probably require more work as I have less experience with save games than Per, and he's got less experience with SQLite than me. >>>> Speaking of conversion: The only thing that makes =2.1_beta4 games >>>> not load in >>>> >>>>> 2.1_beta4 is that the static gateway and zone information is >>>>> missing? Can't >>>> we just copy that from the original map again? (In a conversion >>>> step, maybe as >>>> an external tool if necessary.) >>> It would be a lot of effort that would only be useful/used in beta5. >>> Furthermore it would need a lot of bug-checking, perhaps more so than >>> getting trunk 100% stable. >> Better than leaving a out a release and letting the ship sink in the >> dream >> that the next release would come anywhere "soon". > > To support save games with and without zones would be a massive > undertaking. It would be paramount to adding a large amount of > relatively untested code to a beta release, written under a tight time > constraint, that would only ever be used in 2.1. Writing code for a > single, already outdated release is foolhardy. > > 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. Supporting save games with zones requires *no* additional work. Supporting those without savegames would only require work for 2.1_beta5(+). And it would only require that for savegames made by either 2.1_beta4 (or the non-released beta3 tag) or trunk. 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 incidentally 2.1)? Having them to wait for 2.2? How would that situation be any different from the scenario where we don't provide 2.1? 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. -- Giel
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
