Aditya wrote:
Wondering when the rpm will be released :)
Looping in the Fedora Games list.
It's built for rawhide and F-13. I'm thinking about building it for F-12, but I'm not sure yet. With Wesnoth, there's always the question of whether the user base values online play or their saved games more.
Opinions?
-J
On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 08:12:33 -0500, Jon Ciesla limb@jcomserv.net wrote:
Aditya wrote:
Wondering when the rpm will be released :)
Looping in the Fedora Games list.
It's built for rawhide and F-13. I'm thinking about building it for F-12, but I'm not sure yet. With Wesnoth, there's always the question of whether the user base values online play or their saved games more.
Opinions?
I think for F12 you might let it sit in testing for a month or so to let people switch when they want. This isn't perfect as some people may not know the update is there. I think it should eventually be in F12 as people playing multiplayer are going to want 1.8.
For F11 are you thinking that people should be told to update to F12 or F13 to get the new version? Right now it looks like F11 support will end in mid June.
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 17:47, Bruno Wolff III bruno@wolff.to wrote:
On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 08:12:33 -0500, Jon Ciesla limb@jcomserv.net wrote:
Aditya wrote:
Wondering when the rpm will be released :)
Looping in the Fedora Games list.
It's built for rawhide and F-13. I'm thinking about building it for F-12, but I'm not sure yet. With Wesnoth, there's always the question of whether the user base values online play or their saved games more.
Opinions?
I think for F12 you might let it sit in testing for a month or so to let people switch when they want. This isn't perfect as some people may not know the update is there. I think it should eventually be in F12 as people playing multiplayer are going to want 1.8.
For F11 are you thinking that people should be told to update to F12 or F13 to get the new version? Right now it looks like F11 support will end in mid June.
I for one would be extremely miffed if any update in F12 would make my savegame non-functional.
If 1.8 breaks savegame compatibility, I really think it should not be pushed before F13.
I fail to see what would be achieved by letting it sit in testing - unless it's meant to test that it doesn't in fact break savegames?
Best, Kåre
Kåre Fiedler Christiansen wrote:
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 17:47, Bruno Wolff III bruno@wolff.to wrote:
On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 08:12:33 -0500, Jon Ciesla limb@jcomserv.net wrote:
Aditya wrote:
Wondering when the rpm will be released :)
Looping in the Fedora Games list.
It's built for rawhide and F-13. I'm thinking about building it for F-12, but I'm not sure yet. With Wesnoth, there's always the question of whether the user base values online play or their saved games more.
Opinions?
I think for F12 you might let it sit in testing for a month or so to let people switch when they want. This isn't perfect as some people may not know the update is there. I think it should eventually be in F12 as people playing multiplayer are going to want 1.8.
For F11 are you thinking that people should be told to update to F12 or F13 to get the new version? Right now it looks like F11 support will end in mid June.
I for one would be extremely miffed if any update in F12 would make my savegame non-functional.
If 1.8 breaks savegame compatibility, I really think it should not be pushed before F13.
I fail to see what would be achieved by letting it sit in testing - unless it's meant to test that it doesn't in fact break savegames?
Best, Kåre
This is exactly the 1.4>1.6 debate, practically verbatim, and why I'm leaning towards Bruno's proposal ( :) ). People who primarily play online are adamant that we update a stable release. People who primarily play solo are adamant that we do not update a stable release. I happen to primarily play solo, and I'm running a local build of 1.8, so that's no help. :)
Unless I hear a great deal of wailing and gnashing of teeth in the next few days, I'll probably proceed with Project Bruno.
I'd also like to hear from wtogami, the co-maintainer, but I've not heard from him since he changed jobs, though I have his new email.
-J
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 20:34, Jon Ciesla limb@jcomserv.net wrote:
Kåre Fiedler Christiansen wrote:
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 17:47, Bruno Wolff III bruno@wolff.to wrote:
<snip>
I think for F12 you might let it sit in testing for a month or so to let people switch when they want. This isn't perfect as some people may not know the update is there. I think it should eventually be in F12 as people playing multiplayer are going to want 1.8.
<snip>
I for one would be extremely miffed if any update in F12 would make my savegame non-functional.
If 1.8 breaks savegame compatibility, I really think it should not be pushed before F13.
<snip>
This is exactly the 1.4>1.6 debate, practically verbatim, and why I'm leaning towards Bruno's proposal ( :) ). People who primarily play online are adamant that we update a stable release. People who primarily play solo are adamant that we do not update a stable release. I happen to primarily play solo, and I'm running a local build of 1.8, so that's no help. :)
Unless I hear a great deal of wailing and gnashing of teeth in the next few days, I'll probably proceed with Project Bruno.
I'd also like to hear from wtogami, the co-maintainer, but I've not heard from him since he changed jobs, though I have his new email.
I'm a little confused as to what that means.
Bruno's suggestion seems to be that the updated will be pushed in a month or so. How does that help anyone?
The online gamers probably want it now. The solo-players don't want it at all. How will it help to delay anything a month? That just makes no-one happy. If I need to be hit with an unwanted update, I might as well get it now as in a month. I still vote no (and have already blacklisted Wesnoth updates until this thread is resolved), but if it's decided to push an update the breaks savegames, I fail to see what is won by waiting a month.
My understanding has always been that within the same Fedora release, I should expect to be able to do updates without anything breaking functionality. To me, this feels like pushing a major version of, say, gnumeric, that wouldn't read my old files; and doing so mid-Fedora-release.
Best, Kåre
Kåre Fiedler Christiansen wrote:
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 20:34, Jon Ciesla limb@jcomserv.net wrote:
Kåre Fiedler Christiansen wrote:
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 17:47, Bruno Wolff III bruno@wolff.to wrote:
<snip>
I think for F12 you might let it sit in testing for a month or so to let people switch when they want. This isn't perfect as some people may not know the update is there. I think it should eventually be in F12 as people playing multiplayer are going to want 1.8.
<snip>
I for one would be extremely miffed if any update in F12 would make my savegame non-functional.
If 1.8 breaks savegame compatibility, I really think it should not be pushed before F13.
<snip>
This is exactly the 1.4>1.6 debate, practically verbatim, and why I'm leaning towards Bruno's proposal ( :) ). People who primarily play online are adamant that we update a stable release. People who primarily play solo are adamant that we do not update a stable release. I happen to primarily play solo, and I'm running a local build of 1.8, so that's no help. :)
Unless I hear a great deal of wailing and gnashing of teeth in the next few days, I'll probably proceed with Project Bruno.
I'd also like to hear from wtogami, the co-maintainer, but I've not heard from him since he changed jobs, though I have his new email.
I'm a little confused as to what that means.
Bruno's suggestion seems to be that the updated will be pushed in a month or so. How does that help anyone?
The online gamers probably want it now. The solo-players don't want it at all. How will it help to delay anything a month? That just makes no-one happy. If I need to be hit with an unwanted update, I might as well get it now as in a month. I still vote no (and have already blacklisted Wesnoth updates until this thread is resolved), but if it's decided to push an update the breaks savegames, I fail to see what is won by waiting a month.
My understanding has always been that within the same Fedora release, I should expect to be able to do updates without anything breaking functionality. To me, this feels like pushing a major version of, say, gnumeric, that wouldn't read my old files; and doing so mid-Fedora-release.
Best, Kåre
What about leaving it updates-testing indefinitely? That way people who really want it can get it without , and those who don't or don't opt in won't?
-J
On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 14:42:16 -0500, Jon Ciesla limb@jcomserv.net wrote:
What about leaving it updates-testing indefinitely? That way people who really want it can get it without , and those who don't or don't opt in won't?
For F11 I think that is reasonable as it is close enough to end of support that a key fix for the older version is unlikely to be necessary. It is still an abuse of testing though.
I think for F12 this abuse is probably too much. While Wesnoth normally shuts down support of older versions very quickly after releases there is more risk that we will need an update for the older version. Also the abuse of intent of testing seems more extreme when one is talking about 8 months instead of 2 months.
Going for we may want to think about providing both the latest version and the version that was latest at release time. The default preferences and save areas can be set in the executable. There would still be some issues when switching between versions. And it is also probably a policy violation.
Being able to update save files would be a very nice pony, but I can't see that working in general as there are data structure changes and campaign changes with major releases and 100% accurate conversion isn't going to be possible.
On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 21:25:18 +0200, Kåre Fiedler Christiansen fedora@kaarefc.dk wrote:
Bruno's suggestion seems to be that the updated will be pushed in a month or so. How does that help anyone?
I expect the common case is people are playing only one campaign at a time. When someone finishes their current campaign they can do an upgrade using the version in testing and start new games with 1.8.
This probably won't help for systems where multiple people are playing solo campaigns or for people that aren't aware that there is a version in testing that they should use to update to at a convenient time.