Posts: 1 921
Threads: 273
Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Reputation:
If you've followed our news for a while, you should be familiar enough with our posting pattern to recognize this will be one of those "the latest release-affecting annoyance in Ares development" posts.
A while ago, a mysterious guest submitted a mysterious patch mysteriously implementing issue #617, PowersUnit= logic for more than one vehicle a side..
The Mysterious Guest was even nice enough to provide a patch to the patch to address some issues.
Back then, I already voiced concerns about tacking on yet another activation-related feature, rather than re-designing the whole system, but due to time concerns, I scrapped the alternative branch and merged the Mystery Patch into trunk.
And people were happy.
Alas, as is often the case, there are more bugs. There seem to be special cases related to harvesters, and I'm sure the more we look, the more we'll find. I checked if the Mysterious Guest was still around, but it doesn't look like it.
What does that mean?
It means we have three choices:
- Scrap the feature. Disable it, and, should 0.3 happen, fix it up for that. That would hurt since it's a community submission and mostly done, but would require little further work before 0.2's release.
- Leave it as-is. We could just drop the feature on the community as it is, with a list of unsupported cases and known issues in the documentation. That would be the easiest and quickest solution, but also the sloppiest.
- Invest the time to fix it. Which means delaying Ares 0.2's release.
Since it's not just a question of delays, but also a question of time and work invested by us, I've decided to just ask you up front: How do you want us to proceed?
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.
Posts: 156
Threads: 17
Joined: 9 Jun 2007
Reputation:
I think that option 2 is the best one for now. As far as I can tell, the circumstances under which the feature doesn't work are known. We could put something like "Note: If any of the tags relating to the old Powered Unit logic are used, the new logic will not work" or something like that in the manual, as well as any other known issues.
"The present is theirs. The future, for which I really worked, is mine."
- Nikola Tesla
"My - y - my - your - my vision has permutated. My - y - my - your - my plans have followed a path unpredicted by the union of Nod and GDI. Your - my - our - our directives must be reassessed." - Kane/ CABAL
![[Image: 9853.png]](http://internetometer.com/image/9853.png)
Posts: 36
Threads: 3
Joined: 17 Apr 2010
Reputation:
Go with #2. Sure the two issues I've stated are there, but I feel that these are not as important as other issues lurking around in Ares development.
Besides, Mystery went through all the trouble to help implement multiple powered units, even to fix issues related to hovering, powered harvesters, coincidentally.
Posts: 120
Threads: 14
Joined: 18 May 2010
Reputation:
I vote #2, the bugs are not major. But I would like My. Guest to come back and fix the bugs.
Java student.
Posts: 130
Threads: 28
Joined: 9 Aug 2006
Reputation:
I vote #2, Best option for now
Posts: 317
Threads: 25
Joined: 2 May 2010
Reputation:
Vote 2. I'll get on IRC tonight, but how much time do I have to get Bounty in?
Posts: 28
Threads: 0
Joined: 19 Jul 2010
Reputation:
I say 2 as be daft to scrap when done so much work and 0.2 will be a Duke Nukem if keep delaying
Any word on future yet?
Posts: 89
Threads: 0
Joined: 19 Oct 2009
Reputation:
So long as the mysterious patch doesn't cause bugs in other features, which seems fairly unlikely, it'd be best to go for 2 right now, in my opinion.
Release it in its current state and fix it if you feel like it later.
Posts: 1
Threads: 0
Joined: 1 Nov 2010
Reputation:
In my opinion you should take it out of 0.2 and save it for 0.3.
Avoiding bugs and getting 0.2 out the door should be the main concern I think, and perhaps you could leave a branch with the Mysterious patch open for people to grab if they want this feature.
Posts: 156
Threads: 17
Joined: 9 Jun 2007
Reputation:
There are only a few (and I mean only a few) bugs with this feature. The bugs this feature has are known and can easily be avoided without losing any of the functionality this feature offers. See my post above.
"The present is theirs. The future, for which I really worked, is mine."
- Nikola Tesla
"My - y - my - your - my vision has permutated. My - y - my - your - my plans have followed a path unpredicted by the union of Nod and GDI. Your - my - our - our directives must be reassessed." - Kane/ CABAL
Posts: 1 921
Threads: 273
Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Reputation:
(15.05.2011, 06:09:56)Orac Wrote: So long as the mysterious patch doesn't cause bugs in other features, which seems fairly unlikely, [...] If you say so...
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.
Posts: 89
Threads: 0
Joined: 19 Oct 2009
Reputation:
16.05.2011, 00:16:18
(This post was last modified: 16.05.2011, 00:16:52 by Orac.)
Well I've been looking for unwanted interactions with other Ares features and I've yet to find one. If I do then I'll certainly report it. The only problems I've noticed are the already outlined ones.
Posts: 119
Threads: 12
Joined: 3 Apr 2011
Reputation:
Coming from the new guy perspective, and reading the above referenced thread, it doesn't seem like the issue detracts from the game in a significant manner. If perfection is the goal, Ares will be dead. Satisfactory progress seems to have been achieved, so perhaps including this issue in 0.2 as per Option #2, and keeping it on back burner for 0.3, should it happen, might be the best thing to do.
FormerAres Documentation Manager
Nobody here but us trees...
Graion Dilach Wrote:Worm, you know this guy is an American lawyer of some sort.  Good one!
Posts: 3
Threads: 0
Joined: 16 Apr 2011
Reputation:
|
Renegade
Professor_Tesla
Drogan
