02.10.2006, 02:15:51
I still vote for just making it read .xcml files. They already are a packaging format for exactly the information you want to pack, they are supported by a widely-spread distribution compiler, and the user has the possibility to export a seperate .exe for people who don't want or can't use the new system. (What are the software-side requirements for you program? Do we have to fear stuff like Windows X.P SP2 + .NET 2.0 or something?)
I also vote for A, compilation into mixes, for several reasons:
I also vote for A, compilation into mixes, for several reasons:
- Folder-copying and free files are just messy
- We didn't analyze .mixes, compiled tools and tutorials and taught newbs about .mixes for years just to say "you know what? fuck this shit." now and just put it in the folder.
- Security-reasons/promotional aspects: Fear of content theft was big enough to have people write an extra mix compiler whose products are supposed to be inaccessable by the Mixer; do you think your program will find wide-spread adoption if the modder's hard work just lies around in the ripper's folder, ready for his taking?
Forum Rules
(01.06.2011, 05:43:25)kenosis Wrote: Oh damn don't be disgraced again!
(25.06.2011, 20:42:59)Nighthawk Wrote: The proverbial bearded omni-bug may be dead, but the containment campaign is still being waged in the desert.