saturnV wrote: ↑07 Dec 2020, 15:28
Finally, and most importantly, spring developers have no control over BA.
Of course they do.
1) spring developers control the rapid downloadsystem.
Forboding Angel made a request to move the BA rapid repo from its original site to the github he and Floris had created:
Then abma did as asked.
2) spring developers control the forum, of course including the BA subforum.
many locked/split threads and warnings and bans. not always neutral moderation.
3) spring developers have control over the engine. (duh)
They can use this to get leverage. "Either you do what we tell or spring development will stop and we turn off the server."
4) spring developers have control over the lobby.
using botflag-system to cripple teamhosts that used spring versions <104.
I agree that they do have some control, but if you click that kloot post you linked, you'll find a link inside:
Your argument (either out of willful ignorance or out of self-serving interest) also ignores the history of Mando's exploits, which were used to regularly hurt players (viewtopic.php?f=16&t=36556
etc), so it holds no factual weight.
In the case of 103.0 and earlier the devs do have reasonable reasons to restrict it to incentivize usage of newer ones : an exploit that could kill battle rooms and was used by mando himself (yes, the guy that runs the new BA server).
I think a good reason to not restrict is breaking compatibility with macs that still worked with 103.0 but not later versions.
There were BA versions made compatible with 104.0 and later, but they were rejected by the some within the community again and again, they boycotted the ba10 rooms and seeded ba9 rooms and eventually got people to move to their server.
That removed the incentive for the people that managed the BA rooms on the official server to maintain them (in which case they should have removed them instead of letting them stay there broken!).
Whoever holds the keys to some code base or infrastructure does have some power ("do what we say or we turn this off or stop maintaining"). So does the community that uses it ("do what we say or we either quit or replace you").
There's effort required to maintain things. Both sides can "abuse" their power. "How big is the abuse" should be considered. Tolerance goes both ways, etc.