+- Renegade Projects Network Forums (https://forums.renegadeprojects.com)
+-- Forum: Inject the Battlefield (https://forums.renegadeprojects.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=60)
+--- Forum: Old RockPatch Discussions (https://forums.renegadeprojects.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=59)
+--- Thread: Rock Patch 1.10 development thread (/showthread.php?tid=741)
RE: Rock Patch 1.10 development thread - Bobingabout - 19.04.2007
arn't you the 1 who sugested someone post it in the first place?
i see nothing there but the truth.
RE: Rock Patch 1.10 development thread - Nighthawk - 19.04.2007
Unless I'm given a good reason not to, or ordered by DC or Ren not to, I'll keep rolling back your edits to that page, VK, which are technically vandalism. I don't see what the problem is anyway, your versioning scheme is still there, it's just being compared to a more standardised and understandable versioning scheme.
Edit: I think you're getting too fussed over nothing to be honest.
RE: Rock Patch 1.10 development thread - TheMan - 19.04.2007
Bobingabout Wrote:arn't you the 1 who sugested someone post it in the first place?
i see nothing there but the truth.
me? No, I never cared about the version names, but modcnc versions is a good thing, but I got angry becuse vk paused for no reson.
Just delete it so he can start work again. I do it if I get premission.
[Offtopic] haha bobing have -2 in reputation
RE: Rock Patch 1.10 development thread - Bobingabout - 19.04.2007
i meant CnCVK, but i'm not 100% sure it was him...
and Prime gave me the -2 rep.
RE: Rock Patch 1.10 development thread - Beowulf - 19.04.2007
CnCVK Wrote:until someone will delete this ModEnc page.Dude... you're making mountains out of molehills.
http://modenc.renegadeprojects.com/RockPatch:Versions
Seriously...
RE: Rock Patch 1.10 development thread - Renegade - 19.04.2007
CnCVK Wrote:The RP 1.10 is suspended for unknown time.
CnCVK Wrote:until someone will delete this ModEnc page.RockPatch:Versions in no way is or claims to be official. On the contrary, it even acknowledges in the Notes section that the numbers depend on your releases and versioning scheme.
http://modenc.renegadeprojects.com/RockPatch:Versions
RockPatch:Versions is nothing but a guideline for those you confused with your godforsaken crack party naming scheme - it's not much different from someone posting "CE is the version after 1.08 SE" at PPM; it's just not posted at a forum, and tries to keep up with current developments.
So if you need a cop-out to drop pd's project after you ran it into the ground and fucked it up beyond recognition, so you can work on your beloved ETS instead, where the TS people still treat you like a god (until they, too, realize how much you fuck up)...
...GO FUCK YOURSELF. I am not going to take the blame for you fucking up every single decision ever since you took over this project. If you want to quit RockPatch, fine. We can't force you to continue. But at least be honest with the community. We both know that, if it was really this single page bothering you, you could always move somewhere else and add a giant text to RockPatch's startup saying "ModEnc versions not beink official".
You have ignored every input from the community ever since you took over this project, that alone proves that you could ignore my opinion on the version mapping just as well; you need an excuse to stop - that's all. You're pissed off by the fact that we don't bow down like good little underlings and swallow every crap you serve us, like the TS people do. So instead of considering for one second that you might be the problem, and not the entire rest of the community, you just pick a good target for the blame, behave like I'm the reason you quit, and move on to ETS, where the people still kiss your ass and put up with everything you do.
All I did was compiling a nice little guide to the crap everybody has complained about ever since you introduced it. So don't fucking pretend I'm the reason you quit.
blackheartstar Wrote:They should each make there own revision pages since neither of them can accept the others view. As a argument like this will not get anybody anywhere. VKs unorthodox system vs Rens fantasy numbers. Ren should know VK wnt change his mind and VK should know Ren wants his way. Argh its just a system of release lol.There is no need for VK to accept anything. My numbers are unofficial and purely out of my head (although not exactly "fantasy"). I know that, he knows that, everybody knows that. It says so right in the header - which is exactly the reason why no smart man would believe this crap that he'd quit his project just because some guy somewhere thinks some of his versions should carry a different designation.
If he wanted to, he could just ignore the page, while newcomers could use it to get an orientation of which version to download.
But no, he needs an excuse to quit - and picked me for that.
TheMan Wrote:WTF? why do you act like a child?He can't, because he tried. Removing any content from ModEnc without a logical reason or consent is considered vandalism - and since he decided to vandalize the page rather than to discuss changes multiple times, he's currently under a three day ban.
remove it by yourself
Nighthawk200 Wrote:Unless I'm given a good reason not to, or ordered by DC or Ren not to, I'll keep rolling back your edits to that page, VK, which are technically vandalism.Which is exactly the right thing to do, as outlined above. If anybody wants to discuss changes, they're all free to use the talk page.
Nighthawk200 Wrote:I don't see what the problem is anyway, your versioning scheme is still there, it's just being compared to a more standardised and understandable versioning scheme.Exactly my point, and exactly the reason why everybody should see how lame his excuse it.
TheMan Wrote:me? No, I never cared about the version names, but modcnc versions is a good thing, but I got angry becuse vk paused for no reson.You don't get permission, because there is no logical reason to delete the page. It is clearly marked as unofficial, and nothing on it states anything untrue. The mapping is just not supported by VK.
Just delete it so he can start work again. I do it if I get premission.
And no, we're not gonna delete it. It is VK's fault that thing is even needed, and I'm not gonna delete a perfectly fine page that could help everybody new to RockPatch just because Mr. Stubborn Coder cannot accept the fact that he's the only one in the entire community who thinks this crappy versioning scheme is a good thing.
He does not want to stop because I, personally, don't like his versioning scheme. If he really cared for that, he'd have threatened to quit every single of the dozen times I complained about it in the past year. He has his own, personal reasons for quitting, and I'm not gonna let him blame me for his inability to cope with the fact that not everybody in the community likes to bow down to the merciful rule of VK the first.
To the community as a whole: If it makes you happy (and you want to look like an idiot), blame me. If you have a brain, think about how much sense it makes to ignore an entire community for a year, only to then claim to be quitting over one insignificant opinion piece.
This is not about me, and which version numbers I'd give past RockPatch versions. This is about VK, his ego, and his attitude. Nothing more.
RE: Rock Patch 1.10 development thread - blackmask0 - 20.04.2007
Renegade Wrote:This is about VK, his ego, and his attitude. Nothing more.
Well said.
RE: Rock Patch 1.10 development thread - Bobingabout - 20.04.2007
ok, since i last visited that wiki page, the version numbers make so sence. i listed it the way i think on the talk page, basicly, all RPCE is 1.09, for the simple reason that its between 1.08 and the new 1.10.
RE: Rock Patch 1.10 development thread - blackheartstar - 20.04.2007
Bobingabout Wrote:ok, since i last visited that wiki, the version numbers make so sence. i listed it the way i think on the talk page, basicly, all RPCE is 1.09.
I just read what you had to say on the wiki and can fully agree. IMO this whole thing has blown way out of proportion on both sides. At the same time I agree with REN that its no good reason to drop development of the patch. If any of us dropped what we did becouse of anothers opinion none of us would ever get anywhere in life.
RE: Rock Patch 1.10 development thread - Renegade - 20.04.2007
I have replied on ModEnc's talk page, but to sum it up for the readers here: Both of them purely made their case on base of naming similarities in VK's version, which, as stated both on ModEnc and here numerous times, make no sense at all.
Example: Bob, how could CE 74 logically fall under the same minor version as CE, if it includes an entirely new memory allocation system, so gravely impacting the engine that VK released a beta for it for the first time ever?
You re-write significant parts of a program from one version to another. Not from one minor revision to another.
In fact, VK's very own naming supports me on this. Even in his freaky naming system, he changed the name when the new allocation system came, knowing the change was far too significant for a mere revision.
As said above, the article page quite clearly states why I picked the current numbering - so far, neither of you claiming "it makes no sense either" has found any logical argument against that. All you're saying is "1.08 SE has 1.08 in it, so it must be 1.08!! And CE 74 has CE in it, so it must be 1.09 as well!!!!" - not considering, of course, that, if you argument from VK's naming scheme, you after to argument from VK's naming scheme - and that, quite clearly, states that CE is not 1.09.
So. You are, just as me, entitled to your own opinion. But if you want to convince me my numbering makes no sense either, you should concentrate on logical arguments, rather than "IT LOOKS TEH SMAE!!!11!!1!".
Not to mention that you both conveniently ignore that, right on the article page (again), it says that the numbering might have to be changed if VK actually releases a 1.10. But hey, it has the same name...must be equal, right?
RE: Rock Patch 1.10 development thread - VK - 20.04.2007
I have never said that I want to quit from RP project.
I just "suspend" it.
Quote:in no way is or claims to be official.and why it in RockPatch_Docs: namespace?.
Quote:You have ignored every input from the communityI always read and analyse it.
If you talk about wishes - the coders of patch don't need any demands.
Quote:If he wanted to, he could just ignore the page, while newcomers could use it to get an orientation of which version to download.My version of this page allow it to.
and it more simple (read attached page from RP 1.10 help).
Quote:He can't, because he tried.xa-xa-xa
Removing any content from ModEnc without
a logical reason or consent is considered
vandalism - and since he decided to vandalize
the page rather than to discuss changes multiple
times, he's currently under a three day ban.
I can delete it every day
Quote:You don't get permission,No. Do it!
Quote:and that, quite clearly, states that CE is not 1.09.RPCE isn't a.b.c,
where:
a = 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,....
b = 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,....
c = 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,....
About that RPCE not compatible with previous versions of Rock Patch -
nothing bad here, it already be incompatible three times: 1.05, 1.06, 1.07.
Read status page again
it's simple RPCE, not more
RE: Rock Patch 1.10 development thread - Renegade - 20.04.2007
CnCVK Wrote:I have never said that I want to quit from RP project.Yeeeees. And the US don't wage war for oil...they "protect their country from global terrorism".
I just "suspend" it.
CnCVK Wrote:Quote:in no way is or claims to be official.and why it in RockPatch_Docs: namespace?.
- It isn't.
- It is in RockPatch: for a simple reason: It is information relating to RockPatch (
Makes sense, doesn't it?). Or are you suggesting all information in the XCC: namespace is official and from Olaf van der Spek as well?
CnCVK Wrote:...and then ignore it.Quote:You have ignored every input from the communityI always read and analyse it.
CnCVK Wrote:If you talk about wishes - the coders of patch don't need any demands.No. I'm talking about stuff like consistent, sane versioning, more stable (less frequent) releases, beta-testing, no useless renaming of stuff in between versions...and if I felt like searching through the hundreds of posts on this topic, I'd probably find a dozen more things.
CnCVK Wrote:lol...of course your page is simpler - it's inconsistent! (Suprise!)Quote:If he wanted to, he could just ignore the page, while newcomers could use it to get an orientation of which version to download.My version of this page allow it to.
and it more simple (read attached page from RP 1.10 help).
Either you list revisions, then you have to list all of them, adding at least another 14 versions to your list, or you don't, then it shrinks down to
- Rock Patch 1.11 (non-released yet)
- Rock Patch 1.10
- Rock Patch Celebration Edition 74
- Rock Patch Celebration Edition
- Rock Patch 1.08 SE
- Rock Patch 1.08
- Rock Patch 1.07
- Rock Patch 1.06
- Rock Patch 1.05
- Rock Patch 1.04
- Rock Patch 1.03
- Rock Patch 1.02
- Rock Patch 1.01
- Rock Patch 1.00
CnCVK Wrote:You could empty it, only to have it restored. Or you could try to hack the server, leading to legal action to me, and that I'd have to inform the other community webmasters of your dangerous character traits...not sure anybody else would host you if your last host kicked you out because you hacked him for his personal opinion...Quote:He can't, because he tried.xa-xa-xa
Removing any content from ModEnc without
a logical reason or consent is considered
vandalism - and since he decided to vandalize
the page rather than to discuss changes multiple
times, he's currently under a three day ban.
I can delete it every day
...not to mention that we have database backups, so it's not like that would change anything either.
CnCVK Wrote:I thought you could do it yourself? Do you need other people to get banned, so you can claim I'm attacking the community, abusing my power to spread lies? Oh pleaseQuote:You don't get permission,No. Do it!
CnCVK Wrote:Yes. And that is the problem.Quote:and that, quite clearly, states that CE is not 1.09.RPCE isn't a.b.c,
where:
a = 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,....
b = 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,....
c = 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,....
CnCVK Wrote:About that RPCE not compatible with previous versions of Rock Patch -Did so. Found no note of incompatibility?
nothing bad here, it already be incompatible three times: 1.05, 1.06, 1.07.
Read status page again
And, you seem to make a mental mistake there...let's assume you were right, and 1.05, 1.06 and 1.07 were incompatible with previous versions (for which you brought forth no proof). Then out of nine versions pd released, three were incompatible with earlier versions.
Even if one assumes 1.08 SE is compatible with earlier versions (of which I'm not convinced), that still means that, from three versions you released, two were not compatible with earlier versions.
And that is just the superficial look. Because, other than you, pd did not declare his revisions incompatible with their parent versions. Meaning that even though 1.05 may not have been compatible with 1.04c, 1.05b and 1.05c were compatible with 1.05.
Can you say the same about you? Your official position for CE is that no version is or has to be compatible with the previous version, meaning, looking at it right from the official VK point of view, your last fourteen releases were incompatible with each other.
There is a big difference between breaking compatibility because it's necessary, and breaking compatibility because you're too lazy to guarantee it and enjoy renaming things. So don't try to drag pd's work down to your level. It's cheap, even for you.
CnCVK Wrote:it's simple RPCE, not moreYes. It is basically a different project. Not "RockPatch" anymore, but "RPCE". That may be good for you, 'cause you got the spirit of pd out and turned this into your own, personal assembly playground, but that doesn't mean I or anyone else has to like it. And we have the right to voice our dislike for it.
RE: Rock Patch 1.10 development thread - Bobingabout - 20.04.2007
with the compatibility. all mods written for an earlier version worked fine with and previous versions, except, when 1.05(long time, i can't remember) and 1.08, and then that was only if you used the logics that were deleted/changed. then RPCE came out, and changed a lot of things, not just 1 thing, but A LOT of things, most of them without reason.
anyway. why argue over all this, all it needs to know is it goes from 1.08SE to RPCE, RPCE74 is still RPCE with 1 change (some of the monster changes in PDs versions was also things like 1.05b to 1.05c etc) sure it was a fairly large change. then 1.10.
RE: Rock Patch 1.10 development thread - VK - 21.04.2007
Quote:Either you list revisions, then you have to list all of them, adding at least another 14 versions to your list, or you don't, then it shrinks down toNo.PD's "a b c" - isn't revision, it's versions.
It added new features, however (read status page)
Quote:Can you say the same about you? Your official position for CE is that no version is or has to be compatible with the previous version, meaning, looking at it right from the official VK point of view, your last fourteen releases were incompatible with each other.You should forget about it - it's in history!
(I delete all RPCE and RPCE74 installers except RPCE #0051& RPCE74 #0102)
However this only first version, which use revisions system, so it can have some issues
RE: Rock Patch 1.10 development thread - TheMan - 21.04.2007
Is RP still paused?
I just readed this again more carefullly this site http://modenc.renegadeprojects.com/RockPatch:Versions
I dont se any wrong with it at all. The version tab was good for people that dont understand.
What your problem is with it?