Wesnoth 1.1.2

Post by **freim** » March 23rd, 2006, 11:43 am

Skippy wrote:
frame wrote:There is no "option" that is missing.
Great! Where may I obtain the music files separately to augment my (hypothetical) lite download?

Yes, take that single sentence completely out of context. Very nice...

No one is obligated to supply you with a lite d/w. Free software is about giving people freedom and possibilities, not feed you everything with a silver spoon. Grow up.

Post by **torangan** » March 23rd, 2006, 11:46 am

Skippy wrote:Great! Where may I obtain the music files separately to augment my (hypothetical) lite download?

Use the webfrontend to the Subversion repository.

Skippy · Post by **Skippy** » March 23rd, 2006, 1:23 pm

frame wrote:No one is obligated to supply you with a lite d/w. Free software is about giving people freedom and possibilities, not feed you everything with a silver spoon. Grow up.

No one is obligated to do anything here - and yet they do. There is generally an attitude among developers that they would be happy to facilitate improving Wesnoth and allowing people to enjoy Wesnoth more. I raised a point about the increasing size of the download and how this limited accessibility. Scott and TimothyP, among others, responded constructively. You started out by suggesting that an option to leave out music would be tantamount to crippling Wesnoth for the benefit of a few people who, if I read the undertone of your comments correctly, are not worth it. As far as I could see, you were proceeding from a false premise.

In what way does anything that has been discussed harm you or your enjoyment of Wesnoth?

Grow up indeed.

scott · Post by **scott** » March 23rd, 2006, 1:55 pm

Skippy wrote:
frame wrote:There is no "option" that is missing.
Great! Where may I obtain the music files separately to augment my (hypothetical) lite download?

There may be a fundamental miscommunication here. The wesnoth team doesn't provide any downloads except for the entire source code. Download packages are hosted here but the team doesn't get involved. Let's say Iwa wanted to package each directory separately, so there are about 45 downloads at 2 MB a piece. He can do it, and the dev team has nothing to say about it. The whole packaging process, including how it is built, how it's distributed, and what goes into each package is a volunteer process that the dev team does not get involved in. Thus, getting the rest of the download is between you and your OS' packager. The dev team is officially blind to the process (although in practice this is sometimes a logical division since there are packagers like Isaac who are also on the dev team). So you and the packager can work out any distribution arrangement you want. Some of the linux distributions actually have 7-10 different packages. That's really lite!

Post by **freim** » March 23rd, 2006, 2:28 pm

Skippy wrote: No one is obligated to do anything here - and yet they do. There is generally an attitude among developers that they would be happy to facilitate improving Wesnoth and allowing people to enjoy Wesnoth more. I raised a point about the increasing size of the download and how this limited accessibility. Scott and TimothyP, among others, responded constructively. You started out by suggesting that an option to leave out music would be tantamount to crippling Wesnoth for the benefit of a few people who, if I read the undertone of your comments correctly, are not worth it. As far as I could see, you were proceeding from a false premise.

In what way does anything that has been discussed harm you or your enjoyment of Wesnoth?

Grow up indeed.

As far as I can see you where advocating changes to how the Wesnoth dev team do their official release, which would affect all users, to accomodate a small minority. I tried to explain how I feel this is the wrong approach. This is as I have already said a packaging issue and is up to the individual packagers which are independent of the Wesnoth project.

Ranger M · Post by **Ranger M** » March 23rd, 2006, 3:01 pm

frame wrote:
Skippy wrote: Great! Where may I obtain the music files separately to augment my (hypothetical) lite download?
Yes, take that single sentence completely out of context. Very nice...

No one is obligated to supply you with a lite d/w. Free software is about giving people freedom and possibilities, not feed you everything with a silver spoon. Grow up.

Frame: Yes, you did get that message across, but from his quote in here onwards, he doesn't seem to be asking somebody else to do it, he seems to want to make his own lite version ("to augment my own (hypothetical) lite download"), however you misunderstood him and assumed that he was asking somebody else to do it for him.

Skippy: the devs make this game, and often get repetedly asked to adjust the download, or make the binarys, etc. It can get very annoying (I have seen perfectly resonable people get really worked up over one seemingly little request). Don't be surprised if you get harsh answers to requests to change the way that it is done, instead do it yourself (as you seemed to suggest that you might do) and then if it proves to be better, then people will use it. However as stated above it will not become official policy, as new versions are released as source code, and nothing else, it is up to volunteers to make the packages (as scott said above).

also when you are saying things about this kind of sensitive area, try to be very concise in what you say, otherwise it leads to misunderstandings like this, which often result in both people leaving feeling hard done by.

im the one you think of · March 23rd, 2006, 4:47 pm

sorry if this is the wrong topic but i thought making a new one would be a waste, but i noticed a few days ago that the drake enforcer has 10% resistnace to pierce (in 1.1.1) so i thought id wait to see if it had changed in the new version i had heard was about to come out, but i couldnt spot it in the changelog so i thought id better post it here, sorry if this has already come up.

Post by **lwa** » March 23rd, 2006, 5:03 pm

As far I know, Mac OS X packages are distributed in the following ways:
- one disk image containing the application, you just have to slide it to the right place (ex: Applications folder) and start with it
- one package, who may containts itself multiple packages. You get the whole stuff at choose what you want to be installed.

Of course some vendor (like Adobe) use theyre own installer/downloader or so, but it breaks the user experience and should be avoided. The user shall not have to read a documentation en english to know how to start a simple application.

One stuff could to be not distributed on the Mac build, the SDL frameworks. It changes seldomly, but that mean the user would have to read a complex manual en english on how to install it by hand.

If you are very short in bandwidth, use anonymous SVN and just download the difference from previous version then compile (once you have downloaded the 800Mb Xcode stuff). Once you know how to do, it's always the same.

doctored · Post by **doctored** » March 24th, 2006, 3:57 am

TimothyP wrote:For those of you concerned with the game size:

On behalf of the music dept, I'll say, I'm sorry for how much size we're adding to the game. If you like, we can make smaller files (which equals lower sound quality. We're already pulling half quality on these files).

In the future, we plan to continue adding more and more music to the library. This will obviously increase the program size even more.

So, perhaps the programmers would like to develop a system which allows the separate download of additional sound/music (and other files) which can be somehow added by end users to the Wesnoth game (preferably with a "Wizard" type program that does all the work for you). These files would be parts of the game that are not essential, but are recommended for those who have the bandwidth.

For example, Jeremy Soule set up DirectSong, which is a website that offers expansion music for Guild Wars.

Should we adopt a feature like this into Wesnoth for those who would prefer to do multiple smaller downloads?

--Timothy

what kind of compression are you guys using?

Post by **Yogibear** » March 24th, 2006, 6:42 am

smchronos wrote:Cool Yogi. I've noticed one thing right off the bat. In the multiplayer screen, where it lists all of the games up and all of the players on the server, there seems to be a bug. At least for me anyway. This bug is that when someone leaves a game, they do not show up as a white name (not playing) but remain as a red name (playing) with the game's name next to them. Any insight?

I am afraid, i can't help you with that particular thing. It surely is a bug and there are problems with the player lists in and outside the game. At the moment we are mostly concentrating on adding new features in so the release is a little more buggy than you might be used to. In addition, devs like me and others are short on time so we have to carefully pick what we are doing which mostly results in adding new code instead of maintaining the old one.

But - times will change eventually. When i am done with finishing the current feature i am doing, i plan to concentrate more on bugfixing. And as we approach a new stable release (no idea when that will be) bugs will reduce more and more.

In the meantime it would be a great help if you post the bugs you have seen on gna (you can search the wiki to see how to do that).

Post by **Yogibear** » March 24th, 2006, 7:21 am

As you might know, i am doing the packaging for windows at the moment and i can't tell about the other systems. Regarding windows, there is a little dilemma: To do the package you need to compile the source and as i stated before somewhere, this is next to impossible for a non-programmer without massive help from someone who knows how to do it (ask Sapient if you don't believe me).

As a consequence, the windows packager needs to be a coder and therefore almost automatically belongs to the dev team.

Skippy wrote: There is generally an attitude among developers that they would be happy to facilitate improving Wesnoth and allowing people to enjoy Wesnoth more.

This is an important point. It takes quite a bit of altruism, to participate in a free software project. The only rewards are your own satisfaction of having done something worth it and a couple of people saying "thank you!". On the other side of the medal there is hours and hours of struggling until finally you are done.
If people start getting harsh, it is because they once (or more than once) too often did not get a "thank you" but instead "i want..., why is it not there?" (not relating this to you, Skippy). This happened to frame a couple of times and made him become very sensitive about it. It does not mean everyone has to be bowing and telling "thank you, great master" all the time he talks to a dev. It just means to think carefully about the way to present a wish or criticism.

Skippy wrote: No one is obligated to do anything here - and yet they do.

I don't feel an obligation really to provide the windows packages. But to be honest i feel kind of a - hmm - lets call it "urge" to do it. Mostly because i am one of two persons at the moment that know how to do it. And the other one (Dave) did it for years and is very relieved that he no longer has to do it anymore.

I think reducing the download size is a good idea. The key to this is probably to provide separated packages. Music is an obvious candidate, translations and graphics maybe too. We should take this to a separate thread and discuss it there. More packagers is a good idea, too. Which brings me back to "The ultimate guide of compiling wesnoth on windows for non-programmers". It will have to wait a little bit but i am pretty sure it will come...

Skippy · Post by **Skippy** » March 24th, 2006, 8:40 am

Just to make it clear - THANK YOU.

I appreciate the effort that everyone puts into this project.

Post by **TimothyP** » March 24th, 2006, 4:05 pm

doctored wrote:what kind of compression are you guys using?

We are using Ogg Vorbis. Is that what you mean?

--Timothy

doctored · Post by **doctored** » March 24th, 2006, 6:08 pm

TimothyP wrote:
doctored wrote:what kind of compression are you guys using?
We are using Ogg Vorbis. Is that what you mean?

--Timothy

yeah thats what i mean you may be able to get better compression out of mp4 audio not sure if that would be worth the effort of converting though

Post by **torangan** » March 25th, 2006, 1:52 pm

doctored wrote:yeah thats what i mean you may be able to get better compression out of mp4 audio not sure if that would be worth the effort of converting though

mp4 is not a free audio format so it's out of question anyway. Vorbis ist just about the only format we can use with reasonable compression.

PS: To name the usual conception error - the format is Vorbis audi delivered in an Ogg container.