On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Per Inge Mathisen <[email protected]> wrote: > Most of the patches that benefit campaign are small and easily > backported (terrain renderer notably excepted - but I'm not sure it > should be backported).
As the branches diverge, they won't be so easily backported. And having to have two games that are effectively the same thing, but one for campaign and one for skirmish, as they diverge... It'd just be a nightmare for users as well as devs. I don't think it would reduce anyone's workload. > That is what we keep thinking, and yet about every release we get new > campaign bugs. Those are always the bugs that are found last and fixed > even later. I think the solution is for all devs to just skim through transporter.c, mission.c, and message.c. Our main problem is that we assume units are always on the map. But in a campaign mission, they're often not on the same map as the currently active one. Maybe we should have some more abstraction. See: http://developer.wz2100.net/changeset/8965 > Which is a real pain for savegames. Once get serious about reworking > the scripting system, that will be fun too (not). Also future movement > changes can subtly break scripts that depend on old behaviour to get > units where the scripts expect them to be. Movement changes can't break anything, unless they're a major bug such as a unit being ordered to move somewhere not actually getting there. That's not any movement change, that's a bug. -Zarel _______________________________________________ Warzone-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
