Copy & Paste patch, reworked

[belugas]

Well.. maybe I got carried away a bit. Let say that the idea of the patch itself generates mixed feelings. I do not like the idea of it, personally. It makes the game way too easy. It ends up by a very few efforts and a lot of contemplation. Is it for the best of the game? Honestly, i doubt that. The game is easy enough as it is now, making it even easier is not something really wanted (still in my point of view).

Making it a cheat might be logical, along the lines of the Build-On-Pause. But then, it had to be done in a much better implementation. The part that really bugs me the most is the part where the models are saved. Every one can than share the patterns, without even learning out of it. That's getting near let-the-game-do-it-by-itself type of game.

So... let see what will be provided.

[Starbud]

I'm also one of those who didnt know how much work it is to make it work and that you take on responsibility to fix errors as well when adding something.

Maybe it depend on the goal for the game the player might have making it feel like a cheat or not.
I view it as a tool to make massive networks and good repeated designs, i need to use the tool in combination with the magic bulldozer because the towns and objects are almost always in the way according to me.

My opinion

[dbncoold]

Hello,

I have two comments on this patch.

1. It is awesome! I think it is the best patch ever made for OpenTTD. It should undoubtedly be added to the trunk. It makes it very easy to build huge rail networks with good designs. Perhaps it may be too much advantage for a multiplayer game, so it could be added as a single player cheat. However, it would be also useful for coop games.

2. I am not sure if anyone has come across this problem, but this patch causes my OpenTTD to crash when I have AI competitors in a single player and i try to load a copy-paste template. I am using the patch with 7.1 Release code r16540. I have attempted to fix it (attached), but with such limited time i have, i was not able to completely fix it. The game does not crash immediately with my fix, but AI stops responding and sometimes the game does crash still.

Thanks

[Starbud]

Although A LOT of people agree with you that it is a great function and that A LOT of people like to se it included into the game from start, some of the developers have pointed out that the whole thing would recuire A LOT of effort from their side to maintan since it dosent follow the codingstyle of the rest of the game.
Until it does it will not be considered for inclusion and will continue to be a patch with whatever bugs it might have.

I love the patch too

[dbncoold]

I wonder that if it's such a popular patch, why don't OpenTTD developers work on it as a feature for future releases. They can re-write it in a clean way as they wish. The code is already there all it needs is to be re-written cleanly. Obviously, people are reluctant to waste time cleaning it up because the development team has objections even if the patch was clean.

[Rubidium]

I wonder that if it's such a popular patch, why don't OpenTTD developers work on it as a feature for future releases.

You're getting OpenTTD for free. The developers writing it do it for free, as a hobby. As such the developers have no real incentive (read paycheck [0]) to write stuff they do not like. So the best way to get some feature into OpenTTD is find a (few) developer(s) that like the feature and are willing to invest time in it. This feature, with its constant whining why it isn't in the 'official' OpenTTD, is getting, due to the whining, further and further away of finding interested developers.

And again... once it hits 'official' OpenTTD the maintainance is fully on the shoulders of the developers, which means only *finished* features have a chance of getting in. We don't like to see a massive increase in bugs. The major 'non-feature' development lately has all been to get rid of some age old bugs forever. The 'fallout' of rewriting that stuff resulted in quite a number of new features, but you generally won't see that because it's all 'hidden' (in the game mechanics).

Please take a look at the prominent Integrated Nightlies and patch packs (MiniIN, ChrisIn, CommunityIN, ...) to see what happens when everybody gets his/her (unfinished) patches included without quality control. Most do not survive long enough to be 3 months old and the topics are loaded with bug reports/crashes, not to mention the bugs/crashes that don't get reported because "it is a patch pack and bugs/crashes are normal". If they do survive more than 3 months someone is really dedicated, yet it will still die within a year because it becomes a maintainance nightmare.

Anyhow, the constant "why not" annoys people and primarily the people that have something to say over its inclusion in OpenTTD. And why should *we* (developers) do something if no one is interested in doing it? "I cannot do it" is a weak excuse; almost everyone can do it. It's no more than a "I'm too lazy to figure out how to do it and my only contribution to this 'feature' is telling other people to do it".

Don't blame me though; I have no use for the feature myself and yet I have looked at the code, commented on its (code) quality and reported a couple of bugs which then got reintroduced over and over again.

[0] All donations so far have been used to pay for the costs of hosting the website, repository, bug tracker and the facilities that compile OpenTTD for you on a nightly basis, which is also used for releases because that makes it less likely to do something wrong.

[dbncoold]

That's exactly why i suggested that it be included as a feature for a future release. If the developers re-write it, it will be up to par with the coding standards and it will be nearly bug free. Nobody is motivated to spend time cleaning it up if the developers are not willing to include it in the trunk. So i think if the developers don't want to re-write it then they have to give their word that if the patch is cleaned up it will definitely get in the trunk, then perhaps someone may be motivated to re-write it.

Yes the game is very nice and loaded with features . It is definitely great for a freebie, but if i were an OpenTTD developer i would pay attention to the users and try to incorporate the features that they really like. It seems a lot of people really like this patch. I guess in the end it is up to the developers to decide though.

[Starbud]

But the developers dont have unlimited time unfortunatley, sometimes it would be good if some people did but they dont
If there was nothing else to do i think the developers might take a look at it, until then i think they will wait until it seem to be ok before they consider it.

Compare with your friend who fix your car for free, if you complain that he or she didnt also do something else then that person will propably not fix your car again.
I think we can be happy that they are fixing the game at all

According to me they do take notice about what other people would like and if one of the developers like to fix it it will be fixed, otherwise not.

That's my impression of the people programming the game

[Yexo]

So i think if the developers don't want to re-write it then they have to give their word that if the patch is cleaned up it will definitely get in the trunk, then perhaps someone may be motivated to re-write it.

Can you please a few posts back in this topic starting with this one?

but if i were an OpenTTD developer i would pay attention to the users and try to incorporate the features that they really like.

We do pay attention to users, but that doesn't mean we always agree on what features are a good idea to incorporate.

[Rubidium]

So i think if the developers don't want to re-write it then they have to give their word that if the patch is cleaned up it will definitely get in the trunk, then perhaps someone may be motivated to re-write it.

And then someone rewrites the patch in a way that is even messier, are we obliged to include the even buggier version because we (without seeing anything) approved that it would go in?

but if i were an OpenTTD developer i would pay attention to the users and try to incorporate the features that they really like.

We do pay attention to users, although you can NEVER please ALL users. There is a group of users that like it, there is another group that has a profound dislike of it.

[dbncoold]

Compare with your friend who fix your car for free, if you complain that he or she didnt also do something else then that person will propably not fix your car again.

Note that i am not complaining. I am just making a suggestion on how to improve the game.

And then someone rewrites the patch in a way that is even messier, are we obliged to include the even buggier version because we (without seeing anything) approved that it would go in?

I meant if it's clean enough, because that is the only reason for re-writing it. I really hope that the developers do it because then it will be clean and guaranteed to be included. I know it is not a simple patch. Perhaps only the developers can write it in a perfectly clean way.

There is a group of users that like it, there is another group that has a profound dislike of it.

Understood. And if it was included as a cheat (but somehow allowing it in coop games! ), then both groups will be satisfied i think.

[Starbud]

I meant if it's clean enough, because that is the only reason for re-writing it. I really hope that the developers do it because then it will be clean and guaranteed to be included. I know it is not a simple patch. Perhaps only the developers can write it in a perfectly clean way.

I'm sure the developers CAN, but then again there is the time issue.
And another requirement is that one of the developers suddenly get the intrest of doing it.

I wouldnt mind learning C++ to be able to do it but i also have that timeissue and i'm just coding assemblylanguage because i like the speed of the finished code.
But some day i would like to have the time to learn C++ good enough to make a real contribution.

[KingNimby]

I have to say I'm more than a little amused and sympathetic to the devs that they had to re-argue their points on page eight after only just getting done saying the same stuff to me on page seven.

To recap: The patch needs an active developer, which is unlikely to be an existing openttd dev due to time constraints and/or fundamental opposition to the nature of the patch. To have any hope of eventual inclusion in trunk, it needs to become a cheat feature and lose the template saving function (both of which concessions I could happily live with.)

Maybe one day I'll have a stab at it myself, but there's a long way to go before that.

[Bilbo]

To have any hope of eventual inclusion in trunk, it needs to become a cheat feature and lose the template saving function (both of which concessions I could happily live with.)

I use template saving function quite often to save some good templates for later use and I use it sometimes in multiplayer for pasting smaller pieces of track layouts (most often 2 or 4 track station leading to 3-line track, rarely I paste also something else, like service center with depots, etc ...), sometimes I use it to move existing stuff one or two squares away (If I found that I've built good thing but at bad place.) So the "new" patch would disallow this and so sooner or later someone would make small "patch to patch" that allows template saving and using in multiplayer.

Chance of current messy code to get included in trunk are basically zero and even if someone would rewrite the functionality to be clean and nice, there are some developers opposed to the idea of this patch, so IMHO chance to get this feature somehow to trunk is quite low.

I guess this feature will have to live as a patch.

[SirkoZ]

I agree with Bilbo on NOT making this patch as a cheat and that templates are indeed very useful (even if only for small but mundane/repetitive sections)!

Now then - please NO MORE such questions:
-why isn't it in trunk (USE SEARCH!),
-why don't developers rewrite it (because then it will be properly formulated),
-why not loose the templates and make it as a cheat (concessions will get you nowhere far from a patch for a patch as Bilbo pointed out)!!!

Isn't it good enough that the lead programmer has explained the obvious many times here (and other topics before talking about this) - I don't know how anyone even dares to post those same questions (newbies especially).
It really isn't fair to anyone.
Review the source, ask some friend that knows how to code in C/++ or better learn how to program yourself.
Until then be thankful that the patch is available AND that Bilbo even made a custom patch-pack that is even compatible with the latest release version and transparent in multiplayer yet very feature-packed!

With that said - I must again point out that I am NOT a programmer (laziness or not) and even I could write up some patches have been quite like-able. That is to say - you can learn a lot even from the OpenTTD source and some searching on the internet and perhaps then help Bilbo or anyone else rewrite the patch line by line at a time but this is getting besides the point already.

Phew. Now - please - no more agitating developers with this.

[Starbud]

I have to say I'm more than a little amused and sympathetic to the devs that they had to re-argue their points on page eight after only just getting done saying the same stuff to me on page seven.

It dosent matter who says what (including me ofcourse), the following constructive discussion is more for the ones reading it later than than anyone in particular, such as yourself.

I get the feeling youre a person who live in the now and mostly look for your own intrest, if that is correct it seems rather improductive to make a contribution you seemingly dont want?

[dbncoold]

It should undoubtedly be added to the trunk.

Now then - please NO MORE such questions:
-why isn't it in trunk (USE SEARCH!),...

Obviously you are missing the point. My original post was a statement, not a question. Also, from the number of times this issue has been brought up, you can see the level of popularity that this patch has.

Review the source, ask some friend that knows how to code in C/++ or better learn how to program yourself.

The problem is not programming the patch. The patch has already been programmed. It is an issue of the developers refusing to include it, even if it was cleaned. You know people get tired of having to continuously updated a patch every time a new build is out.

[Rubidium]

You know people get tired of having to continuously updated a patch every time a new build is out.

You know (some) developers get tired of having to continuously fix the misconceptions every time a new post is made to this thread.
If you would actually follow the discussion of this thread you would KNOW that the isn't finished, just look at the number of TODOs in the patch. Any good reason for us to support something unfinished?

This patch has been here for a very long time and we have made some suggestions to make it possible to get into trunk, but the sheer lack of someone actually making the changes just kills the patch. Together with the lack of knowledge of people who have been updating the patch for the last years by (re)introducing bugs, updating not the last (and bugfixed) patch but some older version, ...

Finally: if so much people are interested in it, why hasn't the patch been fixed? It shows a lack of interest of people with actual skills. And the group isn't that large, based on the relatively small number of people complaining about not having it, way less than one in thousand complain! We almost have 2000 downloads a day, yet by far no 2 post per day in this topic and most posts are of this topic's regulars ranting why we haven't added it to trunk yet.

[dbncoold]

You know (some) developers get tired of having to continuously fix the misconceptions every time a new post is made to this thread.

There are no misconceptions here. Again, my post is merely a suggestion
It is true that fans of this patch must update it continuously every time a new build is out. The patch never works with new builds without modification since it touches many different parts of the code.

if so much people are interested in it, why hasn't the patch been fixed? It shows a lack of interest of people with actual skills.

Rubidium, i think the problem is not lack of interest. This particular patch is not a simple one. Perhaps only active OpenTTD developers can accomplish it as a team to make it bug-free.

[Starbud]

I think anyone with a fair ammount of coding familiarity can do it, the thing taking time is propably how much that person need to look trough the rest of the code to figure out how to write the code properly.