tunnel

[Draakon]

Fortunately for us, trolling is against the rules, and this is going to be his third strike.

Perhaps read the rules again as your statement is a false positive.

Also, unlike Draakon, some of us here like to back up what we say with references or facts.
I don't know about you but in my quick skimming over the copyright law of estonia, I can't find anything that backs up Draakon's claims.

First, i was talking about registering license (but some other guys doesn't read very well), second the last update i saw on any related law was 2006, since then laws have been changed but not there or here in any part of the WWW.

[GoneWacko]

Oh darn. Caught in the act.
Well yes, I did make that trolling rule up on the fly.

Unfortunately that, unfair as it may be, does not mean you're in the clear.

[dihedral]

hehe - but arguing with moderators/admins is against the rules

[athanasios]

Maybe Draakon is above the law!

[dihedral]

then he has far to fall!

[GoneWacko]

He was banned already.

So perhaps this thread might need some clean up so that we can go back on-topic?

[dihedral]

can we split the off-topic posts to another thread? it is funny to read

[orudge]

Leave the posts here as a warning to others. Anyway, if you do actually want to talk about the subject in hand, resume discussion now.

[dihedral]

Last time we discussed about it, we did not liked it, therefor decided not to integrate it
Assuming you;re talking about the TTDPatch version... of course

It depends what kind of enhancement you are talking about.

If it is the rails that are running on the top of the tunnel entrance, no way.
We talked about it on IRC, I do not have the courage to try to find the conversations on the logs.

But basically, we did not liked the idea nor the look.
plus, once more, we do not have to do everything TTDPatch does, and vice-versa.

considering what 'tunnels' actually are in the game, i can really understand that it would be a heck of a mess trying to get this implemented cleanly! besides it would not really improve the map array. I think what Belugas said is enough to stop any possible discussion - at least he expresses the point very clearly, which should stop any further discussion

[maquinista]

If the developers don't want it, We must wait unofficial releases (like mini-in) with enhanced tunnels.

[Gremnon]

You're assuming there's someone who will try to code it, and maintain it.

[maquinista]

You're assuming there's someone who will try to code it, and maintain it.

Yes.

[Gremnon]

Hmm.

Maybe it's about time I took a look and see what I can do... I admit I'm not too good at coding... but I'll have a look anyway.
No promises.

[dihedral]

If the developers don't want it, We must wait unofficial releases (like mini-in) with enhanced tunnels.

you will want a branch for that, and i doubt you will get one

[CMircea]

If the developers don't want it, We must wait unofficial releases (like mini-in) with enhanced tunnels.

you will want a branch for that, and i doubt you will get one

That depends. Many patches don't have a branch, many patch backs (aka IN`s, or Integrated Nightlies) don't have one.

Back to the topic, as I said, I haven't ever needed it, and I doubt I will, and I couldn't care less if it's added or not. If you people want it so badly then write a patch for it, or if you don't know how to program in C++, get someone else to do it.

[dihedral]

If you people want it so badly then write a patch for it, or if you don't know how to program in C++, get someone else to do it.

that is actually the worst thing... "i want something, so make it for me!"
i hate that

[Gremnon]

Well, if you put it that way...

If anyone who can code it feels up to it, would they please try?

Happy now?