sty settings?!?!

Joe · Post by **Joe** » Fri May 12, 2006 6:21 am

just wondering if i could get the pig sty settings from someone, like just the zone shooting ones and the zombies, thanks

joda.bot · Post by **joda.bot** » Fri May 12, 2006 9:12 am

Bump, anyone got the modified code "sty" requires ? The settings probably come from the same person. Guess wrtlprnft has the code ?

@Joe: I guess you need a modified 0.2.8 server for this to work.

the pig · Post by **the pig** » Wed Jul 19, 2006 3:10 pm

Hi everyone. I finally had some time to work on the sty again.

Between getting ready for the piglet (in september) and living in Swampy's, its been a busy couple of months.

Anyway, I finally got around to updating to 0.2.8.2, which was a little more difficult than I thought it would be because CVS dissappeared

My code is all subversionized now.

So, if anyone wants to give it a try, I can either post the binary with config files for windows. Or I can try to post a source patch. Hopefully the patch creator for TortoiseSVN is better than the one for TortoiseCVS.

Website · Post by **Z-Man** » Wed Jul 19, 2006 3:34 pm

Source patch! Source patch! (Insert long winded discussion with Luke who'll claim that you're required to to so anyway according to the GPL because running a server is distributing a binary that leads nowhere. But really, it's not a "source patch or windows binary" question, it's a "source patch only or patch and binary" question.)

If the patch tools are no good, plain old "svn diff" generates usable patches already.

the pig · Post by **the pig** » Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:28 am

Not a problem z-man. I'd be happy to post the patch.

After I finish what I'm working on I'll put it up. Collision detection and deflection of shots didn't end up working perfectly...

Luke-Jr · Post by **Luke-Jr** » Thu Jul 20, 2006 7:56 am

z-man wrote:Source patch! Source patch!

Can't we just give him Svn access so he can at least put it in /private until he's "official" or something? =p

z-man wrote:(Insert long winded discussion with Luke who'll claim that you're required to to so anyway according to the GPL because running a server is distributing a binary that leads nowhere. But really, it's not a "source patch or windows binary" question, it's a "source patch only or patch and binary" question.)

Welll..... technically, a source patch isn't enough if he distributes a binary-- he'd need to distribute the full source. But who's complaining? ;p

Website · Post by **Z-Man** » Thu Jul 20, 2006 10:51 am

Abut SVN: you remember our discussion about how the usage of SVN for private modifications, always merging in the changes from the mainline, blows up the repositorty because it makes every change appear N+1 times, where N is the number of private modification branches? No, this would be an ideal task for darcs, and the next best thing currently is doing the modifications in a private checkout and doing "svn diff > /some/safe/location" for backups and publishing. Or using an SVK mirror if you don't want to lose track of the order of your individual changes.

Luke-Jr · Post by **Luke-Jr** » Thu Jul 20, 2006 4:53 pm

z-man wrote:Abut SVN: you remember our discussion about how the usage of SVN for private modifications, always merging in the changes from the mainline, blows up the repositorty because it makes every change appear N+1 times, where N is the number of private modification branches?

I also remember not applying that decision in practice myself.

z-man wrote:No, this would be an ideal task for darcs,

Indeed, but the Svn copy of the repository is always going to be 'blown up'.

z-man wrote:and the next best thing currently is doing the modifications in a private checkout and doing "svn diff > /some/safe/location" for backups and publishing.

IMO, it's better to just ignore the size and hope that when we can get a darcs mirror setup, it can detect and handle the merges properly.

Website · Post by **Z-Man** » Thu Jul 20, 2006 5:52 pm

Luke-Jr wrote:Indeed, but the Svn copy of the repository is always going to be 'blown up'.

Who says the private modifications should get mirrored into SVN? Not me, because it doesn't make sense for the reason you stated

Luke-Jr wrote:IMO, it's better to just ignore the size and hope that when we can get a darcs mirror setup, it can detect and handle the merges properly.

That hope will certainly be disappointed. Darcs can't magically take two equivalent changes in different contexts and unify them. If the change exists once in darcs, it will always be kept as a single change and will always be recognized as one single change no matter how often it is pushed or pulled around; but if the change has already been ripped apart by another system (and don't forget, mashed together with other changes because we're doing bulk merges), it's next to impossible to identify equal changes.

Luke-Jr · Post by **Luke-Jr** » Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:56 pm

z-man wrote:
Luke-Jr wrote:IMO, it's better to just ignore the size and hope that when we can get a darcs mirror setup, it can detect and handle the merges properly.
That hope will certainly be disappointed. Darcs can't magically take two equivalent changes in different contexts and unify them.

Why not? Subversion can handle its feature-adds from CVS.

the pig · Post by **the pig** » Thu Jul 20, 2006 7:07 pm

Well, I'll post the patch that I'm running on Pig Sty now. This has the not quite working collision code in it, which is disabled via config for now. It does work, but it causes some strange lag at least locally for me.

And as always, this isn't intended to be release quality. Some of the hacks were put in because I can't change the client side :B)

Best of luck to anyone that tries to compile! Should work on linux/mac, but only has been tried on windows.

groundpig

Website · Post by **Z-Man** » Thu Jul 20, 2006 7:49 pm

Luke: No, it doesn't. If I moved a file in CVS the CVS way (copy manually, delete original in CVS, add new file to CVS), that's what SVN shows after the conversion as well. Look at the log of configure.ac, which was copied at some point from configure.in. And that even though detecting identical files is far easier than detecting identical changes.

Pig: thanks!