- have you tested it? (before you post a answer)
What can I find out by testing?
Does it patch cleanly against beta4? I believe you without trying it.
Does it work? You say it does, I did not try it, so I believe you.
So, you have a good working patch against 1.2 beta 4.
- if not, can you explain me better your fundaments? (patch i have changed VERSION and REVISION, patch i shared doesn't)
So you have a modified beta4, and hacked the protection mechanisms to fake it as beta4. Ok.
In a MP game, you now get two things:
- You get an unfair advantage compared to others.
- If you hit a desync, we are the people that get the report at our doorstep, and have to look for days only to come up with nothing, because you are using other software than we think.
The other thing you may want with a patch is inclusion in the OpenTTD program.
However trunk is not the same as beta4, so it cannot be applied.
(Yes I am aware that there is a non-zero chance that it works, but you're talking 1 in 1000 or so, and I am not prepared to download a patch, create a copy of the repository, apply the patch, try to compile, and mess around with improvements with about 0.1% chance of succes. I have better things to do with those hours.)
- better, can you explain any answer without testing it?
I just did, didn't I?
In fact, I don't even have source code of any released version at my machine in a state where I can work in it. I only use trunk. There are two simple reasons for it. One is that we make many many releases, so I'd have to keep lots and lots of source code around just in case. Second, if I'd download the sources, setup a working environment around it, apply your patch, compile, try it, it works. Then what?
The only thing I can do then is report "it works". Well, you did that already.
Moving it into trunk does not work in general (see above). My conclusion is therefore it is a futile exercise in the first place.
- if you're so worried with patched versions (network compatibilities), why those still appears in MP list?
Because 'network compability' is not something you can detect without actual playing, and getting a desync. If you get one, you know it is not compatible. If you don't get one, either you are compatible, or you did not test good enough. There is no way of being sure the software is fully network compatible at all times. Heck, we had desyncs between servers and clients where all programs were known to be an official version. These bugs can linger for several years before being triggered, just because the specific condition is so rare, it almost never happens. In other words, "I tested and it worked" is just reducing the chance, not eliminating existence.
(And thank you for proving my point about network compability being too complicated to understand for many people.)
- and the last question, any bug found, can you post it at this thread, right?!
How does a player or do we know the bug was due to your software changes?
If you fake to be an official version, there is no way to decide the software was actual a different version.
Such bugs just get filed un 'beta4', and we waste hours finding out how the problem may have happened in the official version. If we are very
lucky, the crash log gives weird line numbers, and we can see it was actually a faked version, but which patch was added then? It could be any of the patches floating around, including non-published ones.
PS3: "I'm not big enough to start a war but powerfull enough to fight on it" <<-- quote
I don't fight wars, it's just a waste of energy and time. Writing this post cost me one hour, time I could have spend more usefully.
I am however willing to explain why I think like I do, and am willing to accept good arguments against it.