Transport Tycoon Forums

The place to talk about Transport Tycoon
It is currently Tue Oct 16, 2018 11:53 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 108 posts ]  Go to page Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Sep 17, 2017 5:23 am 
Offline
Tycoon
Tycoon
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 6349
Location: Wakefield, West Yorkshire
kamnet wrote:
Create your own fork
Not what my suggestion was about at all, and I certainly do not have the skills to manage an entire fork of a project the size of openttd.
Furthermore, doing so would create a rift between the purists wanting to keep compatibility, and those happy to move away from it.

_________________
Image
Worst Behaved IRC Member of 2008, 2009 & 2010 - Go Me!


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Sep 17, 2017 7:34 am 
Offline
Tycoon
Tycoon
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2007 2:23 pm
Posts: 4684
Location: Lost in Music
Redirect Left wrote:
That isn't how any serious development works, you can't just decide you want to do something, and every one (the other devs) goes "yes, do it!". I'm involved in a few developing things, and i'd be seriously concerned for the integrity of openttd if that is how the dev cycle works.

Yup, spot on, agree with you completely :)

That's why I wrote this... ;)
andythenorth wrote:
All you have to do is earn commit rights, and make the changes

_________________
FIRS Industry Replacement Set (Released) | HEQS Heavy Equipment Set (trucks, industrial trams and more) (Finished)
Squid Ate FISH (ships) (Released) | CHIPS Has Improved Players' Stations (Finished)
Iron Horse (trains, released) | Termite (tracks for Iron Horse, released) | Busy Bee (game script, released)

Road Hog (road vehicles, released)


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Sep 17, 2017 10:23 am 
Offline
Tycoon
Tycoon
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 7:25 pm
Posts: 2619
Location: Kent
Redirect Left wrote:
doing so would create a rift between the purists wanting to keep compatibility, and those happy to move away from it.


The rift is there, anything you do isnt going to create that rift, but i suspect it would alleviate some of the issues.

_________________
Image


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Sep 17, 2017 10:41 am 
Offline
Tycoon
Tycoon
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 1:46 pm
Posts: 1836
Location: Ipswich
Talk is cheap, code much less so.
An implementation of a feature, even if imperfect or incomplete, is far more valuable than discussion/suggestions.

If you want a feature or lack thereof and can implement it, you should just do so.
Having something executable, even if not/never in trunk, gives something concrete and potentially actionable to have future discussions about.

_________________
Ex TTDPatch Coder, Grumpy Greymuzzle
Avatar by MoonsongWolf.
Patch Pack, Github
Dad-Coder since April 2018


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Sep 17, 2017 11:34 am 
Offline
Tycoon
Tycoon
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 5:15 pm
Posts: 6180
Location: Eastern KY
Redirect Left wrote:
kamnet wrote:
Create your own fork
Not what my suggestion was about at all, and I certainly do not have the skills to manage an entire fork of a project the size of openttd. Furthermore, doing so would create a rift between the purists wanting to keep compatibility, and those happy to move away from it.


Well, if not for you, then for somebody else. :) And to be fair, we already do have one fork of OpenTTD that is steadily plodding along. But even with that fork, great care is still being taken for backwards compatibility.

Leanden wrote:
The rift is there, anything you do isnt going to create that rift, but i suspect it would alleviate some of the issues.


Yep, agreed. And I think at this point most OpenTTD players no longer care about backwards compatibility with TTD. Nobody is playing 20 year-old save games. If they want to do so, they can open up any old version of OpenTTD and continue to play it. And there's no reason why we can't have both BC and non-BC versions. If there are future developments which can be ported from one to another, huzzah.

_________________
Do you like drones, quadcopters & flying toys? Check out Drone Strike Force!
Image

Base Music Sets: OpenMSX | Scott Joplin Anthology | Traditional Winter Holiday Music | Modern Motion Music
Other Projects: 2CC Trams | Modern Waypoints | Sprite Sandbox & NewGRF Releases | Ideabox | Town Names | Isle of Sodor Scenario | Random Sprite Repository
Misc Topics: My Screenshots | Forgotten NewGRFs | Unfinished Graphics Sets | Stats Shack | RoadTypes?


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Sep 17, 2017 11:37 am 
Offline
Director
Director
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2017 4:52 pm
Posts: 616
Location: Western Ile-de-France Region
I'm confused here: would that mean the non BC version would need to be compatible with BC? I'm no expert here, but that sounds very hard...


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Sep 17, 2017 12:04 pm 
Offline
Chief Executive
Chief Executive
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 23, 2013 4:33 pm
Posts: 724
Location: Bærum, Norway
kamnet wrote:
I think at this point most OpenTTD players no longer care about backwards compatibility with TTD. Nobody is playing 20 year-old save games. If they want to do so, they can open up any old version of OpenTTD and continue to play it. And there's no reason why we can't have both BC and non-BC versions. If there are future developments which can be ported from one to another, huzzah.

If savegame compatibility should be broken at some point, I think that version 2.0 would be the logical place to do it.

_________________
My screenshots
The 1700-2050 Ships & RVs thread
Norwegian Alternate Town Names


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Sep 17, 2017 12:29 pm 
Offline
Tycoon
Tycoon
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 5:15 pm
Posts: 6180
Location: Eastern KY
leifbk wrote:
kamnet wrote:
I think at this point most OpenTTD players no longer care about backwards compatibility with TTD. Nobody is playing 20 year-old save games. If they want to do so, they can open up any old version of OpenTTD and continue to play it. And there's no reason why we can't have both BC and non-BC versions. If there are future developments which can be ported from one to another, huzzah.

If savegame compatibility should be broken at some point, I think that version 2.0 would be the logical place to do it.


Well, if you wanted to just jump from 1.7.x to 2.0.0, sure. But where OpenTTD updates yearly, I personally don't want to wait two and a half years to do that. But, then again we did jump from 0.7.x to 1.0.0, so... :)

I really don't think it matters what version number a feature gets implemented under. Really the only purpose of having a version number is so that you can have an accounting of what's changed.

_________________
Do you like drones, quadcopters & flying toys? Check out Drone Strike Force!
Image

Base Music Sets: OpenMSX | Scott Joplin Anthology | Traditional Winter Holiday Music | Modern Motion Music
Other Projects: 2CC Trams | Modern Waypoints | Sprite Sandbox & NewGRF Releases | Ideabox | Town Names | Isle of Sodor Scenario | Random Sprite Repository
Misc Topics: My Screenshots | Forgotten NewGRFs | Unfinished Graphics Sets | Stats Shack | RoadTypes?


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Sep 17, 2017 12:39 pm 
Offline
Chief Executive
Chief Executive
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 23, 2013 4:33 pm
Posts: 724
Location: Bærum, Norway
kamnet wrote:
leifbk wrote:
kamnet wrote:
I think at this point most OpenTTD players no longer care about backwards compatibility with TTD. Nobody is playing 20 year-old save games. If they want to do so, they can open up any old version of OpenTTD and continue to play it. And there's no reason why we can't have both BC and non-BC versions. If there are future developments which can be ported from one to another, huzzah.

If savegame compatibility should be broken at some point, I think that version 2.0 would be the logical place to do it.


Well, if you wanted to just jump from 1.7.x to 2.0.0, sure. But where OpenTTD updates yearly, I personally don't want to wait two and a half years to do that. But, then again we did jump from 0.7.x to 1.0.0, so... :)

I really don't think it matters what version number a feature gets implemented under. Really the only purpose of having a version number is so that you can have an accounting of what's changed.

Yes, version numbers matter, like when Python broke compatibility big time between version 2 and version 3. It may be expected that compatibility breaks between major version numbers.

I didn't say anything about a time frame, but I believe that everybody should start thinking ahead about what we'd like to get incorporated into OpenTTD 2.0, and start planning for it.

_________________
My screenshots
The 1700-2050 Ships & RVs thread
Norwegian Alternate Town Names


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Sep 17, 2017 12:55 pm 
Offline
Transport Coordinator
Transport Coordinator

Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:07 am
Posts: 330
Location: Berlin
Hello

kamnet wrote:
leifbk wrote:
If savegame compatibility should be broken at some point, I think that version 2.0 would be the logical place to do it.


Well, if you wanted to just jump from 1.7.x to 2.0.0, sure. But where OpenTTD updates yearly, I personally don't want to wait two and a half years to do that. But, then again we did jump from 0.7.x to 1.0.0, so... :)


It's not mandatory to let version 1.9 be followed by 2.0. A not backward compatible version 2.x can be accompanied by a backward compatible version 1.10, 1.11 and so on.

Tschö, Auge

_________________
further development of My Little Forum 1


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Sep 17, 2017 1:25 pm 
Offline
Tycoon
Tycoon
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 5:15 pm
Posts: 6180
Location: Eastern KY
Auge wrote:
Hello

kamnet wrote:
leifbk wrote:
If savegame compatibility should be broken at some point, I think that version 2.0 would be the logical place to do it.


Well, if you wanted to just jump from 1.7.x to 2.0.0, sure. But where OpenTTD updates yearly, I personally don't want to wait two and a half years to do that. But, then again we did jump from 0.7.x to 1.0.0, so... :)


It's not mandatory to let version 1.9 be followed by 2.0. A not backward compatible version 2.x can be accompanied by a backward compatible version 1.10, 1.11 and so on.

Tschö, Auge


Of course. But OpenTTD's versioning scheme has been to make a major release around April 1 of every year, and that version release number corresponds with the year. 1.0.0 was 2010, 1.1.0 was 2011... 1.7.0 was 2017. I'll grant you, it's all novelty, but I don't see where the devs are going to break with that pattern.

_________________
Do you like drones, quadcopters & flying toys? Check out Drone Strike Force!
Image

Base Music Sets: OpenMSX | Scott Joplin Anthology | Traditional Winter Holiday Music | Modern Motion Music
Other Projects: 2CC Trams | Modern Waypoints | Sprite Sandbox & NewGRF Releases | Ideabox | Town Names | Isle of Sodor Scenario | Random Sprite Repository
Misc Topics: My Screenshots | Forgotten NewGRFs | Unfinished Graphics Sets | Stats Shack | RoadTypes?


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Sep 17, 2017 2:36 pm 
Offline
Chief Executive
Chief Executive
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 23, 2013 4:33 pm
Posts: 724
Location: Bærum, Norway
kamnet wrote:
But OpenTTD's versioning scheme has been to make a major release around April 1 of every year, and that version release number corresponds with the year. 1.0.0 was 2010, 1.1.0 was 2011... 1.7.0 was 2017. I'll grant you, it's all novelty, but I don't see where the devs are going to break with that pattern.

Only one of those, 1.0.0, was a major release. The others are point releases.

I'd say, make a v2 branch now, and rewrite the (insert four-letter word here) out of it, and don't care about breaking compatibility. Pull in all the good stuff that users have been asking for. I'll be happy as a translator and beta-tester.

_________________
My screenshots
The 1700-2050 Ships & RVs thread
Norwegian Alternate Town Names


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Sep 17, 2017 2:38 pm 
Offline
OpenTTD Developer
OpenTTD Developer

Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2007 5:03 am
Posts: 4671
Location: home
kamnet wrote:
Of course. But OpenTTD's versioning scheme has been to make a major release around April 1 of every year, and that version release number corresponds with the year. 1.0.0 was 2010, 1.1.0 was 2011... 1.7.0 was 2017. I'll grant you, it's all novelty, but I don't see where the devs are going to break with that pattern.
While it's a convenient mapping, I don't believe it was designed that way, it just happened by coincidence.

As for 2020, don't know what will happen, but will be interesting to find out :)

_________________
Being a OpenTTD developer does not mean I know what I am doing.
Also, other OpenTTD developers may have different opinions.


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Sep 17, 2017 9:44 pm 
Offline
Transport Coordinator
Transport Coordinator

Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:07 am
Posts: 330
Location: Berlin
Hello

kamnet wrote:
Auge wrote:
kamnet wrote:
Well, if you wanted to just jump from 1.7.x to 2.0.0, sure. But where OpenTTD updates yearly, I personally don't want to wait two and a half years to do that.

It's not mandatory to let version 1.9 be followed by 2.0. A not backward compatible version 2.x can be accompanied by a backward compatible version 1.10, 1.11 and so on.

Of course. But OpenTTD's versioning scheme has been to make a major release around April 1 of every year, and that version release number corresponds with the year. 1.0.0 was 2010, 1.1.0 was 2011... 1.7.0 was 2017.

I think, this (version number vs calendar year) was a coincidence. Once there was a more or less complete OpenGFX-set. That hovered the version number to 1.0 (independence from original game grafics). :-)

But that was not my point. The version number of OpenTTD (and any other software) could climb from 1.9.x to 2.0, but that's not mandatory (as said). It also could raise to 1.10 (and so on). So there is the possibility of a 1.x branch (with x > 9) with backward compatibility and beside it a 2.x branch without this compatibility. Will this happen? Who knows?

Tschö, Auge

_________________
further development of My Little Forum 1


Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Sep 23, 2017 5:07 am 
Offline
Engineer
Engineer
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 29, 2011 5:32 pm
Posts: 42
Location: SW US
kamnet wrote:
Nobody is playing 20 year-old save games.


That's not true. I still fire up my original version of TTD from time to time for nostalgic reasons. Virtual machines are a thing of beauty. Being able to retrieve those games from years ago and trying again (and again) to build it better can be fun, too. Especially when you have to deal with all those limitations that OpenTTD has made obsolete. Admittedly, I haven't done it in awhile, but the games are kept on my not-cold file server because they're definitely not cold data. However...


kamnet wrote:
If they want to do so, they can open up any old version of OpenTTD and continue to play it.


Exactly. And I think OpenTTD has reached the point where backward compatibility can now be honorably retired. We can have the best of both worlds with what we have now. Old-school is preserved well enough that historical "data" can be accessed and...played. That gamer who's had the Civilization game running for literally years and years I think exemplifies the idea behind this ability to preserve and play forever, and I think that's a good thing.

Redirect made a comment about how difficult it is to get things into trunk - that patches are often used instead. I've always assumed that OpenTTD became tightly regulated to ensure the most basic aspects of the game are strictly preserved. There are certain aspects of the game that are cornerstones: the quasi-isometric/3D-from-2D layout, the "curved track is for Locomotion" limitation, etc. If you change it too much, it's not what I call a pure reincarnation of TT. It becomes something else. And that's where we're at right now. "Stifling further developments and improvement" to me is just another way of saying that v1.9 should be the last version whose intent is to strictly conform to TT's spirit. I feel like we're reaching the limit of what can be done without working beyond that.

In no way is this me being critical of anyone's work or anyone's ideas of what OpenTTD is, should be, or might become. It is simply an observation from someone who - if development stopped forever tomorrow morning - would still be left with something he will enjoy the rest of his life and be grateful for those who made it possible. I think that's the finest compliment you could ever give to any group of people who donate so much and receive so little in return.

-Marc

_________________
Kuolema Tekee Taiteilijan


Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Sep 23, 2017 6:20 am 
Offline
Tycoon
Tycoon
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2007 2:23 pm
Posts: 4684
Location: Lost in Music
AntoninKyrene wrote:
It is simply an observation from someone who - if development stopped forever tomorrow morning - would still be left with something he will enjoy the rest of his life and be grateful for those who made it possible. I think that's the finest compliment you could ever give to any group of people who donate so much and receive so little in return.

Nice comment, well expressed :D

_________________
FIRS Industry Replacement Set (Released) | HEQS Heavy Equipment Set (trucks, industrial trams and more) (Finished)
Squid Ate FISH (ships) (Released) | CHIPS Has Improved Players' Stations (Finished)
Iron Horse (trains, released) | Termite (tracks for Iron Horse, released) | Busy Bee (game script, released)

Road Hog (road vehicles, released)


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Sep 24, 2017 6:52 pm 
Offline
Tycoon
Tycoon

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 10:02 pm
Posts: 1272
I have never played TTD,but if I could bring my 1995 Original-TT games into a DOSbox session that would work with my FreeBSD,I'd like that.
But I'd also like to see OpenTTD flower beyond what could be done before.
It's not that hard to run different applications.


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Sep 24, 2017 10:46 pm 
Offline
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2005 8:19 pm
Posts: 17142
Location: Harringay, North London
andythenorth wrote:
AntoninKyrene wrote:
It is simply an observation from someone who - if development stopped forever tomorrow morning - would still be left with something he will enjoy the rest of his life and be grateful for those who made it possible. I think that's the finest compliment you could ever give to any group of people who donate so much and receive so little in return.

Nice comment, well expressed :D


+1

I think many people think that way. Maybe that’s lost in the clamour for NEW NEW NEW all the time.

_________________
Albion: A fictional Britain

Official TT-Dave Fan Club
Dave's Screenshot Thread! - Flickr


Why be a song when you can be a symphony? r is a...


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Sep 24, 2017 11:31 pm 
Offline
Tycoon
Tycoon
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2015 12:44 am
Posts: 2530
Location: Newcastle, Australia
Not easy to improve on perfection. One of the many reasons this game is still being played.

How many other games that started out with the DOS operating system that are still being played today basically still using the same design and play style.

How many games and software that makers suppose to made improved versions and made the program worse.

Yahoo is one I can remember .. was a great chat program using cam and able to type messages to friends .. they improved it and now can not use cam. So was that really a improvement?


Cheers all

_________________
Soot Happens
All my projects are GPLv2 License.
AuzTrains & NSWTrains: http://www.tt-forums.net/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=74193
AuzInd (Industry Set): http://www.tt-forums.net/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=74471
AuzObjects: viewtopic.php?f=26&t=75657
AuzBridges: viewtopic.php?f=26&t=75248
AuzStations: viewtopic.php?f=26&t=76390
AuzTracks: viewtopic.php?f=26&t=82691


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Sep 25, 2017 12:28 pm 
Offline
Engineer
Engineer
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2015 3:03 pm
Posts: 83
leifbk wrote:
kamnet wrote:
But OpenTTD's versioning scheme has been to make a major release around April 1 of every year, and that version release number corresponds with the year. 1.0.0 was 2010, 1.1.0 was 2011... 1.7.0 was 2017. I'll grant you, it's all novelty, but I don't see where the devs are going to break with that pattern.

Only one of those, 1.0.0, was a major release. The others are point releases.

I'd say, make a v2 branch now, and rewrite the (insert four-letter word here) out of it, and don't care about breaking compatibility. Pull in all the good stuff that users have been asking for. I'll be happy as a translator and beta-tester.

I would call 1.2.0 and 1.4.0 major releases. 1.2.0 was the first time that major patches have been implemented (in TerraGenesis as there were more options to generate a map) and 1.4.0 was the CargoDist release. There were also other releases like the more map heights, and auto rail.


Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 108 posts ]  Go to page Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Drury and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000-2018 phpBB Limited

Copyright © Owen Rudge/The Transport Tycoon Forums 2001-2018.
Hosted by Zernebok Hosting.