A heck of a lot of the features you lot are demanding are things us devs want to do, I have a large list of features I've wanted todo including this patch for quit a while and had you waited I'd have written this patch regardless of any bounty.
Aside from that I wont be acepting any bounty payment unless its fairly distributed , to whom exactly being for the core devs to decide.
Feature Bounty - pot $50 - Completed
Moderator: Moderators
Yeah, I concede your points there. I don't think Caydr or I were intending to cause a ruckus 
I've been wanting these exclusive conditions for quite awhile, though- they're a big step towards having units that can do things like Capture, but not assist building other structures, etc., which could lead to some pretty important gameplay breaks. It seemed like a worthy cause 
I've been wanting these exclusive conditions for quite awhile, though- they're a big step towards having units that can do things like Capture, but not assist building other structures, etc., which could lead to some pretty important gameplay breaks. It seemed like a worthy cause 
The purpose here was to stimulate a developer into action by offering a reward for an unusual, eccentric request that won't necessarily benefit the whole as much as things that the entire community can agree on - like the SM3 format.
The vast majority of Spring users, even those evil, evil "casuals" with ridiculous requests, can see the benefit of a new map rendering system. It's a great improvement that helps everyone. It helps the end-user by reducing map size, making maps a lot prettier, and introducing things like bump mapping for the first time.
But if I, as a content developer, modder, or just a nobody, think that X change would be really good but nobody has taken notice (I've been requesting the ability to control these aspects of unit behaviour for a long time), I don't think it's hurtful to anyone to give an incentive.
I made sure that the requirements were strict - it MUST NOT IN ANY WAY interfere with any existing part of Spring. It must be approved by the developer's peers, other developers, the same way any other change would be. I am not blind, I certainly see the possibility that this could backfire, but I think that as an occasional thing it wouldn't be a threat in this way.
I really, really don't mean to cause any kind of problem. JC, I know you understand how I feel, since you're the person I always used to bug about things. As a content developer, I need limitations lifted or there will never be progress or innovation. Am I to bother people like you, who are already contributing so much? Wouldn't it be better if I try to ease the burden by getting others to write competent code?
I do sincerely apologize if this is taken the wrong way. The cash Argh sent to me (you said $20, right?), in addition to $30 from me and anything else that might've been sent, will be deposited in the Spring pizza fund if you feel this would be a better way of doing things and don't want anything like this in the future. But please try to be open-minded. AF himself, a guy who's not an idiot (eh, lately
), said that these were easy changes to make. Which is the better option, persistent nagging that gets me nowhere, or offering cash to someone to do a change and having it just get done, under strict guidelines?
Tim Blok(something!) said to me, in PM, that he supported this course of action. But I respect you enough JC, if you say no more, you'll never see anything like this again from me.
----------
Also, I should mention that almost immediately after I posted this thread, I was asked to remove the bonus for doing the work in time for the next release. I see the wisdom in this, as it will prevent sloppy rushed coding and feature creep.
So AF, please don't try and get your fixes put into .73. It would be horrifying if these was some problem and I was to blame for rushing this. As long as there is a development release sometime in the next month with your changes, that'll be more than enough and give me time to get AA's stuff prepped for when the change goes into effect.
The vast majority of Spring users, even those evil, evil "casuals" with ridiculous requests, can see the benefit of a new map rendering system. It's a great improvement that helps everyone. It helps the end-user by reducing map size, making maps a lot prettier, and introducing things like bump mapping for the first time.
But if I, as a content developer, modder, or just a nobody, think that X change would be really good but nobody has taken notice (I've been requesting the ability to control these aspects of unit behaviour for a long time), I don't think it's hurtful to anyone to give an incentive.
I made sure that the requirements were strict - it MUST NOT IN ANY WAY interfere with any existing part of Spring. It must be approved by the developer's peers, other developers, the same way any other change would be. I am not blind, I certainly see the possibility that this could backfire, but I think that as an occasional thing it wouldn't be a threat in this way.
I really, really don't mean to cause any kind of problem. JC, I know you understand how I feel, since you're the person I always used to bug about things. As a content developer, I need limitations lifted or there will never be progress or innovation. Am I to bother people like you, who are already contributing so much? Wouldn't it be better if I try to ease the burden by getting others to write competent code?
I do sincerely apologize if this is taken the wrong way. The cash Argh sent to me (you said $20, right?), in addition to $30 from me and anything else that might've been sent, will be deposited in the Spring pizza fund if you feel this would be a better way of doing things and don't want anything like this in the future. But please try to be open-minded. AF himself, a guy who's not an idiot (eh, lately
), said that these were easy changes to make. Which is the better option, persistent nagging that gets me nowhere, or offering cash to someone to do a change and having it just get done, under strict guidelines?Tim Blok(something!) said to me, in PM, that he supported this course of action. But I respect you enough JC, if you say no more, you'll never see anything like this again from me.
----------
Also, I should mention that almost immediately after I posted this thread, I was asked to remove the bonus for doing the work in time for the next release. I see the wisdom in this, as it will prevent sloppy rushed coding and feature creep.
So AF, please don't try and get your fixes put into .73. It would be horrifying if these was some problem and I was to blame for rushing this. As long as there is a development release sometime in the next month with your changes, that'll be more than enough and give me time to get AA's stuff prepped for when the change goes into effect.
That's pretty much it, yeah. But a modder needs to be able to force that in some conditions.
Also, if you're working on this AF, could you implement this here too? Doesn't sound like it'd be too bad:
http://taspring.clan-sy.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=6809
Notsharable=1; for sure is something I should've listed.
Also, if you're working on this AF, could you implement this here too? Doesn't sound like it'd be too bad:
http://taspring.clan-sy.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=6809
Notsharable=1; for sure is something I should've listed.
What's in new york? 
They're already in Sweden. AKA the only sane country left in the world. Also the only one not hopelessly in debt, I'm pretty sure. Isn't the US 17 trillion dollars in debt?
Anyway... why new york? I'd say, send them someplace where they can get a tan... Dominican Republic is a reasonably good place, except for the malaria and mosquitos. How's Barbados?
(maybe you were joking... I'm not. For a 1.0 I'm happy with, I'd contribute $500 at least. Depends on the time of year but maybe more like $1500)
They're already in Sweden. AKA the only sane country left in the world. Also the only one not hopelessly in debt, I'm pretty sure. Isn't the US 17 trillion dollars in debt?Anyway... why new york? I'd say, send them someplace where they can get a tan... Dominican Republic is a reasonably good place, except for the malaria and mosquitos. How's Barbados?
(maybe you were joking... I'm not. For a 1.0 I'm happy with, I'd contribute $500 at least. Depends on the time of year but maybe more like $1500)
Last edited by Caydr on 30 Aug 2006, 05:20, edited 1 time in total.
Natalie Portman? Where do I sign?
Actually... she's like 22 or something... I'm only 18... and she's too well-off. Rich girls are a pain in the ass. I know someone that fits my critera much better than her.
So, Barbados? I hear it's very tourist-friendly. I bet there's a Swedish-speaking resort there somewhere.
~~~~
Crap! I search for "barbados swedish resort" and all I can find is information about tiger woods marrying his swedish girlfriend at a Barbados resort!
Actually... she's like 22 or something... I'm only 18... and she's too well-off. Rich girls are a pain in the ass. I know someone that fits my critera much better than her.
So, Barbados? I hear it's very tourist-friendly. I bet there's a Swedish-speaking resort there somewhere.
~~~~
Crap! I search for "barbados swedish resort" and all I can find is information about tiger woods marrying his swedish girlfriend at a Barbados resort!
he US government like most western governments borrow money each year to make up their shortfall, but they're not particularly bothered about paying it back in most cases and instead lending money to say the US government gains you other things such as influence and hearsay, diplomatic influence, even technology and research.Isn't the US 17 trillion dollars in debt?
The US is trillions of dollars in debt. Every time they enar their upper debt limit they raise it in congress. The US is lucky in that its the richest int eh world and the most pwoerful country at the moment. However it could all come crashing down easily.
In the 1920's-30's germany was in a similair position, only germanies neighbours werent so forgiving, they wanted their debts paid. So germany came up with a solution *ahem* printing off more money to pay the debt off. But this resulted in the notes pritned dropping in value and hyperinflation set in, entire wheelbarrows of notes being worthless.
Just as china could demand america pay their debts to it as could other countries, and the US economy would go into freefall. The reason other countries do not do this is because it would be synonymous to a global crash.
Now I've goen offtopic, back to the subject at hand.
I wont implement optimus' method of doing unitlimits, and I dont think I'd be too comfortable taking time out for the implementation me and smoth devised untill my todo list has cleared up somewhat.
Also I am not going to push for 0.73b1 inclusion, rather it'll just get commited to trunk when done and included in 0.74/5/0.8.
Also tobi and jelmer see no point in the canUnload tag I added, so unless anyone here has a use of it I'm going to remove it from v2 of my patch.
-
Tim Blokdijk
- Posts: 1242
- Joined: 29 May 2005, 11:18
You better respect the lead dev!(something!) wrote:...
Tim Blokdijk said to me, in PM, that he supported this course of action. But I respect you enough JC, if you say no more, you'll never see anything like this again from me.
----------
Also, I should mention that almost immediately after I posted this thread, I was asked to remove the bonus for doing the work in time for the next release. I see the wisdom in this, as it will prevent sloppy rushed coding and feature creep.
...
Anyway, I said: "First off I support your action but at the same time I would really like to make sure this won't backfire in any way."
I also PM you right after you started this topic, before anybody responded (other then Tobi).
Just saying that I support you is to simple.
I also mailed Jelmer that I think money will be a factor and that we will have to work with it in some way.
The wisdom in not including the patch in the next release is in that it would mean someone with money can ignore our just freshly decided on procedures. I would not like that as it's hard enough to get some procedures in place without the money factor.
Now I know money can also help with things but as long as we lack the procedures to control it I'm would like to minimize its influence on the project.
http://www.unknown-files.net/index.php? ... &dlid=1620
For those wishing to test v2 of my patch (requires you place over an existing dev build install)
For those wishing to test v2 of my patch (requires you place over an existing dev build install)
Cool, thanks. I heard from someone that a certain developer was a bit troubled by the quality of your initial patch... I take it, it's been improved and cleaned up?
Remember the goal is to make a patch that is approved by peer review and not committed until it has undergone this review.
Remember the goal is to make a patch that is approved by peer review and not committed until it has undergone this review.
Last edited by Caydr on 31 Aug 2006, 20:02, edited 1 time in total.
tobi was a bit peeved by coding style stuff such as bool canattack versus bool canAttack, changed in v2 of my patch.
Also canUnload was removed as tobi and jelmer thought it unnecessary and nobody here objected.
Since I posted the above post, and mailed v2 of my patch, the only feedback I've gotten is your reply and a quick convo with rattle after he asked what'd happened. Argh seems to be using the bianry, but I dont know if he's tested the features.
Also canUnload was removed as tobi and jelmer thought it unnecessary and nobody here objected.
Since I posted the above post, and mailed v2 of my patch, the only feedback I've gotten is your reply and a quick convo with rattle after he asked what'd happened. Argh seems to be using the bianry, but I dont know if he's tested the features.
OK, glad to hear it didn't get nasty with the main devs. For a little while I was worried.
What SVN #### is this built with? Also, can you jot down some quick documentation as to what features you've added and how to activate them?
Thanks very much for your work on this. It'll have massive positive repercussions for every modder.
What SVN #### is this built with? Also, can you jot down some quick documentation as to what features you've added and how to activate them?
Thanks very much for your work on this. It'll have massive positive repercussions for every modder.
I dont ened to document them, I'll just refer to your post as the tags are pretty much identical
these 3 default to the value of the builder tag so it doesnt break existing gameplay. Because of this I added canBuild which disables the unit from building or starting new builds.
canBuild
canRepair
canRestore
canPatrol=1;
canGuard=1;
canAttack=1;
Reclaimable=1;
NoAutoFire=0;
And I dont know which svn build it was based off but there has only been 1 commit (a bugfix) to the files I changed since then so the patch should be upto date.
these 3 default to the value of the builder tag so it doesnt break existing gameplay. Because of this I added canBuild which disables the unit from building or starting new builds.
canBuild
canRepair
canRestore
canPatrol=1;
canGuard=1;
canAttack=1;
Reclaimable=1;
NoAutoFire=0;
And I dont know which svn build it was based off but there has only been 1 commit (a bugfix) to the files I changed since then so the patch should be upto date.
You do need to document them, or at least include the necessary patch to Documentation/changelog.txt.AF wrote:I dont need to document them, I'll just refer to your post as the tags are pretty much identical
(Sorry I didn't comment on that earlier, only today I got tired of writing changelog entries for things I didn't even make
)-
Tim Blokdijk
- Posts: 1242
- Joined: 29 May 2005, 11:18