FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Games

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 04-08-2010, 01:12 PM
Jon Ciesla
 
Default wesnoth 1.8 released

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

--
in your fear, seek only peace
in your fear, seek only love

-d. bowie

_______________________________________________
games mailing list
games@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/games
 
Old 04-08-2010, 03:47 PM
Bruno Wolff III
 
Default wesnoth 1.8 released

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.
_______________________________________________
games mailing list
games@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/games
 
Old 04-08-2010, 05:23 PM
Kåre Fiedler Christiansen
 
Default wesnoth 1.8 released

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
_______________________________________________
games mailing list
games@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/games
 
Old 04-08-2010, 05:23 PM
Kåre Fiedler Christiansen
 
Default wesnoth 1.8 released

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
_______________________________________________
games mailing list
games@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/games
 
Old 04-08-2010, 06:34 PM
Jon Ciesla
 
Default wesnoth 1.8 released

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

--
in your fear, seek only peace
in your fear, seek only love

-d. bowie

_______________________________________________
games mailing list
games@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/games
 
Old 04-08-2010, 06:34 PM
Jon Ciesla
 
Default wesnoth 1.8 released

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

--
in your fear, seek only peace
in your fear, seek only love

-d. bowie

_______________________________________________
games mailing list
games@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/games
 
Old 04-08-2010, 07:25 PM
Kåre Fiedler Christiansen
 
Default wesnoth 1.8 released

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
_______________________________________________
games mailing list
games@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/games
 
Old 04-08-2010, 07:25 PM
Kåre Fiedler Christiansen
 
Default wesnoth 1.8 released

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
_______________________________________________
games mailing list
games@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/games
 
Old 04-08-2010, 07:42 PM
Jon Ciesla
 
Default wesnoth 1.8 released

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

--
in your fear, seek only peace
in your fear, seek only love

-d. bowie

_______________________________________________
games mailing list
games@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/games
 
Old 04-08-2010, 07:42 PM
Jon Ciesla
 
Default wesnoth 1.8 released

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

--
in your fear, seek only peace
in your fear, seek only love

-d. bowie

_______________________________________________
games mailing list
games@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/games
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 07:46 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org