Mini Integrated Nightly [discontinued 31/12/2006]

SirkoZ · Post by **SirkoZ** » 29 Jan 2007 01:19

richk67 wrote:MiniIN has been discontinued as of 31/12/06. Nothing new will be added.

Perhaps one final - 0.5.0-synced release could be done, rich?

glx · Post by **glx** » 29 Jan 2007 01:41

It will

MiniIN is already synced with 0.5.0-RC4

richk67 · Post by **richk67** » 29 Jan 2007 03:04

To paraphrase George Bush snr: "Read my lips! No new patches"

But, yes, there will be a last and final MiniIN, up to v0.5.0... after RC26

SirkoZ · Post by **SirkoZ** » 29 Jan 2007 12:43

That's fair enough.

Kosov_1986 · Post by **Kosov_1986** » 29 Jan 2007 16:35

What's up? You (the developer team) stopped the work? What's the reason? lack of time?

I can't write programs

Miniin was very nice, with its useful patches. I hope someday you restart to develope it, or name a successor person or team, who will develope it.

richk67 · Post by **richk67** » 29 Jan 2007 16:42

There was a fairly lengthy thread about it. Basically the complexity of keeping it in step with trunk was a major headache, and had become a chore to be done, rather than something we were eager to do.

With the pace of change (and scale) in trunk, it just wasnt sane to continue.

If anyone does want to take it over, fine. But be aware it is a CONSIDERABLE workload, and many many questions will need to be asked of the main dev community.

The possibility of course is that it is synced with v0.5.0, and then that is used as the stable base, and no updates from trunk go in. If you want to do that, no one will stop you.

Whatever way around, have fun!

(Im having a blast with RC4 atm.)

Kosov_1986 · Post by **Kosov_1986** » 29 Jan 2007 17:27

richk67 wrote:There was a fairly lengthy thread about it. Basically the complexity of keeping it in step with trunk was a major headache, and had become a chore to be done, rather than something we were eager to do.

With the pace of change (and scale) in trunk, it just wasnt sane to continue.

If anyone does want to take it over, fine. But be aware it is a CONSIDERABLE workload, and many many questions will need to be asked of the main dev community.

The possibility of course is that it is synced with v0.5.0, and then that is used as the stable base, and no updates from trunk go in. If you want to do that, no one will stop you.

Whatever way around, have fun! (Im having a blast with RC4 atm.)

Sorry, but i'm not a programmer. But you guys did good job, many thanks for giving the chance to have these cool features what isn't (yet) in OTTD's mainline program code.

SirkoZ · Post by **SirkoZ** » 29 Jan 2007 20:36

richk67 wrote:... (Im having a blast with RC4 atm.)

Oh yeah? How big of a blast?

lobster · Post by **lobster** » 29 Jan 2007 21:19

praise all, this latest MiniIN fixed my savegame! not 60 years of playing to hell! thank you!

and i can see! finally i can s... well, maybe not that, but still, amazing.

SergeS · Post by **SergeS** » 30 Jan 2007 10:31

And what about to add passangers destinations to MiniIN ?

richk67 · Post by **richk67** » 30 Jan 2007 10:38

SergeS wrote:And what about to add passangers destinations to MiniIN ?

There will be no new patches added. MiniIN will be synced to v0.5.0 on release, and then archived.

wozzar · Post by **wozzar** » 31 Jan 2007 14:21

richk67 wrote:
SergeS wrote:And what about to add passangers destinations to MiniIN ?
There will be no new patches added. MiniIN will be synced to v0.5.0 on release, and then archived.

Why cant Ottd add these patches.

richk67 · Post by **richk67** » 31 Jan 2007 14:38

Because most of the patches are not written to a good enough standard, have plenty of bugs, some are solutions to problems (but not necessarily the best solution), some are too complex to be reliable, etc...

There are a zillion reasons for patches not getting into trunk. Mostly its down to the lack of effort put in by the patch writer in having constructive dialog over improving their code to the required standard.

The right way is to talk in chat with the devs - if you can convince them that the reason for the code is a good idea, then hopefully you can get several of them to review the code. Bring your code up to standard, and then repeat until the reviewer is happy. Then you have to convince the rest of the devs that its really worth it in trunk, and then hopefully you will get your code committed.

Sounds a pain, but what comes out the end is *good code* that has few/no bugs, and improves the game.

Clearly such a process requires a) patience and b) diplomacy. Sometimes when you want to tell the devs where to go, the best thing is to say nothing. I have seen many patch writers give themselves a bad name by badmouthing the devs, or pestering them to add a patch when it clearly isnt ready. Neither approach wins friends amongst the people that matter.

OTTD has a senior design & dev team for a reason - to ensure OTTD is quality. I have seen far fewer bugs in this than in many many published games. It may be frustrating, but it is good for the health of OTTD.

gkirilov · Post by **gkirilov** » 31 Jan 2007 18:45

And what about the "auto signal placement"(separate from the GUI). As far as I know it is been here for a looooong time and it is working perfectly. I've never seen a clear explanation why it is not included in the trunk.

SirkoZ · Post by **SirkoZ** » 31 Jan 2007 23:34

Been there, done that - seen no explanation that is...

richk67 · Post by **richk67** » 01 Feb 2007 00:37

If you've been there and done that, then you will have a definitive answer from a Lead Coder as to why your patch is not suitable for inclusion. If you dont have that answer, then no, you havent done all the dialogue-with-devs work needed.

Its tough, but the onus is on you to make the effort. The devs are busy enough keeping the rest of the system working, and developing the core.

Incidentally, I currently have a patch for a major bugfix that I feel should be in. I actually HAVE commit rights, and yet, I am waiting (OK slightly frustratedly) for other devs to review the code first. I am not confident enough in my own code-correctness, and certainly other devs are not, that I would not DARE to commit code without strong approval from most/all available devs. Its frustrating, but its important to respect the views of the other devs.

SirkoZ · Post by **SirkoZ** » 01 Feb 2007 11:33

Please - don't try to buffer my reply if you don't look at all the facts!

EDIT: Richk67 - explanation sent via PM (I'm just mildly frustrated, that's all).

Quark · Post by **Quark** » 17 Feb 2007 08:25

Please test advanced town handling (buying land and construction) in my build with eyecandy.

zedd · Post by **zedd** » 15 Mar 2007 00:34

So which OpenTTD rell does the current latest MiniIN r8928 work with exactly and where can I get it. I get errors using it with 0.5.0

edit: seems to running despite the errors ... well anyways is this the final already?. if not maybe the sprite limit or whatever it is that only allows me to only use any 3 out of 4 extra vehicle grfs that i want could be increased for the final?

xmart2k · Post by **xmart2k** » 16 Apr 2007 12:42

pleasssseeeee add the industry budget,that patch rulles and the mini wil be complete with it

Transport Tycoon Forums

Mini Integrated Nightly [discontinued 31/12/2006]

Who is online