Jump to content


WFG Programming Team
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by elexis

  1. Queens of the Stone Age with Dave Grohl Glastonbury Festival 2002 Best lineup!
  2. I can just speak on behalf of myself on why I had decided to not contribute for the first half of this year but started committing to Alpha 24 now.
  3. The message I got was "screw wfg", which led me here :-/
  4. Disabling TLS also means disabling encryption, so it would be better fixed. You happen to be on Windows 10? Did you succeed to connect via TLS (in a23b) before? Did you install or configure some networking software (VPN, firewall) (since then)?
  5. Did you modify any files during the pause?
  6. When I first saw the fake ISO view I wrote #4638. One can hack such things by replacing default.cfg until the aspired implementation is deployed. (Ideally every mod could introduce custom config options without having to overwrite what exists, so that two mods can be launched simultaneously without breaking.)
  7. Any mods enabled? Pressed alt+tab during the 6 minutes? Is it possible to reproduce without 6 minutes waiting?
  8. I couldn't reproduce the issue without mods and I don't see in the code how it can fail as it is initialized in the init function. As reported on IRC:
  9. That was +D, try #0ad-dev instead of #0ad if you want to talk to developers. Did you apply any mod? When did the error occur? Perhaps it was something like pressing a key combination during or at the end of the loading screen?
  10. An option for an option sounds a bit meh (why only that one option and not for every option). There is also the fact that all chosen gamesettings are reset when changing the map for Skirmish or Scenario maps.
  11. If I would post something that is completed to 27% that would only mean that it's being pointed out that 73% are missing, so I can only report when something will be done to 100%.
  12. To answer the question, a lot of the alpha 24 work is in private github branches of different Wildfire Games members for the reason fatherbushido has posted. It's sad to see people decide to try to make Wildfire Games obsolete. I would have wished to continue to cooperate together, but Wildfire Games has a 20 year history, has created this very software and the online platforms and to me this is a value byitself to maintain rather than to actively help tear down. So I have to support Wildfire Games and 0 A.D. at the pice that I will have to pay for that.
  13. The default is teams being locked, which I guess is the most prevalent setting? You mean having LMS the default over allied-victory if teams are not locked?
  14. The error happens when enet (udp based network protocol) can't send the network packages to the peer / client (http://enet.bespin.org/group__host.html#ga6ba501b3ee576e5578c8e6d1694ebd49). This might be because a local firewall or other network setting denies the network connection. Perhaps you also have mutliple network controllers where one of them disconnected during the time of hosting.
  15. Disclaimer: This does not constitute legal advice, I don't take liability for the following draft, it only lists the publicly known facts to my understanding and may be subject to revision: 1. Non-profit organization and charitable purposes This article introduces Wildfire Games as a group of volunteers and a member project of the non-profit organization Software in the Public Interest which furthers charitable purposes. You can contact Wildfire Games via the Forums, in the IRC Chat at #0ad and #0ad-dev, or by emailing webmaster at wildfiregames dot com for legal issues. The creators: Wildfire Games In late 2000, Wildfire Games was founded by group of real-time strategy enthusiasts with the intent to create an expansion pack for the game Age of Empires II: The Age of Kings (see this forum post. In 2001 they released it under the title "Rome at War" and it became one of the most successful mods for that game, see moddb page. The developers wanted to follow up "Rome at War" with a total conversion mod, where every aspect of the game would be changed to suit their vision of the game. That year, the idea of 0 A.D. was born. The project: Pyrogenesis and 0 A.D. The software project that Wildfire Games has been dedicated to produce since its founding is the free real-time strategy game of ancient history 0 A.D., and the free game engine Pyrogenesis that 0 A.D. is based on. While 0 A.D. entertains as a videogame, the software is also intended to educate the player on the history of the portrayed civilizations from 500 B.C. to 1 B.C. As of 2019, Pyrogenesis stands as a fully modifiable, platform-independent realtime-strategy game engine, written in C++ and JavaScript, based on OpenGL and SDL 2, supporting singleplayer using AI opponents, an online multiplayer community platform, internationalization support using Transifex, a map editor and much more. 0 A.D. has received thirteen ancient civilizations, artworks and custom music tracks of unmatched quality in the free software community, countless scenario maps and map generation scripts, and built a vibrant online multiplayer community. However, Pyrogenesis and 0 A.D. are far from being finished, miss out on a number of gameplay features, performance improvements, and the historic campaigns that enable the player to relive history. A sequel with civilizations from 1 A.D. to 500 A.D. had been planned for development after 0 A.D. will be completed. The cause: Free software The purpose of present-day Wildfire Games is to create, improve and educate about free software with and for the general public. The motivation to create new software to overcome the limitations of proprietary, closed source software was already born in 2001, when the efforts to create the total conversion mod for Age of Empires II: The Age of Kings failed: (see Wildfire Games Background). "We were continually banging our heads against the wall trying to work around the limitations imposed on us by modding the AoK game. Members were frustrated." (Wildfire Games) "began investigating the possibility of creating their own game engine to support their mod and give them total freedom." In 2009, Wildfire Games switched from a freeware model (gratis to use, but closed source) to a free software license, thereby entitling everybody to study, modify and redistribute the software under the same terms, see The Story of 0 A.D.. The concession to redistribute the software under the same terms is the property that distinguishes most "open source" software licenses from "free software" licenses. See the GPL v2+ and the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 for the exact licensing terms. Free software as a public good The principles of the free software license make it practically available free of charge, empower any user to adapt and redistribute the software to their own best interest without hindrance, qualify the software as a pure public good, authored and purposed for the public interest. A pure public good is non-exclusive, meaning "it is impossible to exclude any individuals from consuming the good", and non-rivalrous, meaning "for any level of production, the cost of providing it to a marginal (additional) individual is zero." The fiscal sponsor: Software in the Public Interest In 2012, Wildfire Games became a member project of Software in the Public Interest ("SPI"). SPI acts as a fiscal sponsor to Wildfire Games, holds funds and accepts donations that Wildfire Games can use to further the causes of the project. As detailed on the SPI website, the Internal Revenue Service accepted SPI as a non-profit organization under Internal Revenue Code 501(c)(3). This means that expenses for the project and donations to Wildfire Games through SPI can be reduced from the taxable income of the donor. Exclusive operation for charitable purposes The IRS defines a non-profit organization to be "organized and operated exclusively" for charitable purposes (see Organizational Test Under 501(c)(3)), serving public rather than private interests. Legally, Wildfire Games remains independent of SPI, and the non-profit status does not extend to Wildfire Games (see https://www.spi-inc.org/projects/relationship/). But whenever Wildfire Games acts through SPI, uses funds that SPI holds, it must be exclusive to the furthering of charitable purposes. See the Certificate of Incorporation of SPI for a full list of the tax-exempt purposes of SPI. The most notable purposes Wildfire Games, in the scope of 0 A.D. and Pyrogenesis, dedicates to are: "To create, form and establish an organization to formulate and provide software systems for use by the general public without charge" "to support, educate and promote the creation and development of software available to the general public" "to teach and train individuals regarding the use and application of such systems" "to endeavor to monitor and improve the quality of currently existing publicly available software" "to foster, promote and increase access to software systems available to the general public" "to solicit, collect and otherwise raise money and to expend such funds in furtherance of the goals and activities of the corporation"
  16. (Or a CURL HTTP post with 0ad, UserReporter has a threaded example, ModIo has a non-threaded async example, but even a synchroneous call is probably sufficient and maybe quick enough if localhost)
  17. Another common trick to avoid issues like that is to rename the file before doing something with it, so that the other process doesn't get into the opportunity of doing something to it.
  18. Wasn't the file truncated to zero bytes and then deleted or something? Like that being two steps that can be affected by concurrency, not only one? It does speak of a different process though. And once python opens file access (regardless of exceptions), 0ad can't open that file for that time, no? It sounds like you dealt with the problem where python tries to open it when 0ad has it open already, but not the other way around.
  19. Last line of the log. So gotta find some mechanism to prevent two processes from reading and writing simultaneously to the same file (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_exclusion#Types_of_mutual_exclusion_devices )
  20. Maybe that would be more logical indeed. March 2018: rP21630 Fix UnitAI behaviour inconsistent with its stance for packed units and set default stance to standground for packed units. April 2018: rP21784 Fix a couple of packing problems from rP21630 rP21786 really fix packing problems reported in rP21630 May 2018: #5175 October 2018: So perhaps the fix to #5091 should be different, I didn't want to get involved with that mudding, but the unpack-loop issue remains reported and is put into the scheduled list #5328 (which means there will be at least three clicks being spent on the issue). (Already the case?) #4015 and D1520 as FeldFeld pointed out. Standground? Simulation commands are orders. The user sends an order so as to start a process. UnitAI has an order queue and performs that one step at a time. Orders can be cancelled by removing them from the queue. So it's logically consistent with the UnitAI in general, but this packing AI may be unique and warrant some different behavior. Reverting to 0% slowly seems sound to me instead of instantly jumping to 0%, which indeed would justify considering to replace the cancel command with the pack/unpack command, and account for that somehow in the packing part of UnitAI. Sounds like invoking spaghetti code but, maybe inevitable. But that's the weakpoint of siege engines, they should be and remain that vulnerable during that stage, no? Agree, it must be fun to play. That proportional-progress proposal is possibly still the right thing to do, depending on expectations of logic and gameplay design. For aggressive stance, and for forced attacks in any stance it sounds reasonable to follow the attacked target. I suppose it's important to satisfy the definition of an order. If there is an order to perform X, then by definition X is ordered to be performed, and that means doing the preconditions like packing to achieve that. So one could introduce an order type (such as ground based attacks) where the siege engine attakcs units in the target area without implying that a specific unit should be attacked (thus not providing reason to have it unpack at any time). Dunno. Images may vary slightly from actual product. There are many ways to skin a cat. Doesn't require hierarchical force to commit a catapult AI fix. But for my review I need a decision whether I want to be frustrated by throwing or riding the bomb.
  21. As per @snelius request, here the replay of this Alpine Mainland 4v4 today: vs. It was a long, balanced and entertaining team game. 2019-06-17_0002.zip Former remains of my city in the center, rebuild and _zoro_s base squeezed together at the top.
  22. The software license relates to redistributing possibly modified copies, the implicit or explicit usage rules enforced by moderators determine what conduct is permissible on the service. Performing a review is not necessarily harmful but can be benefitial if it happens in an acceptable or tolerable tone. In this specific case, there is the question as to which parts of the mod borg- would not disagree with to have in a24 of Wildfire Games. There were some thoughts by online players and even WFG staff members to adopt some of his work (that ought to be the task description if one has a review queue I suppose). From my side hard-counters were a thought I had that should be explored to make the gameplay less linear. borg- did explore that, it's his full right to do so to take it into any way he imagines, and good that he did explore things in general. Also good that he tested it with other human players. The real problem is the interaction between the developer that may have the thought to adopt some of the work and borg- exploring more things before getting one thing into a24 at a time, if he wants to take something into a24. borg- also repeated to me multiple times that multiple changes combined are necessary to actually test this. So I suppose it's really, well, a distributed problem. It's also my problem because I mentioned that I had some interest in seeing that patch, or the explanation of the conditions to having patches submitted for review to Wildfire Games. And the problem of others too who didn't provide borg- the feedback that he could use to become even better at what he is doing. All of that was called review work back in the day. Considering and testing the game with AI players is one of the areas subject to a review. So that particularly isn't bad to have done and reported. The question is really the one about dedication. Should this mod be reviewed for Wildfire Games or not for the purpose of adopting parts of it for Wildfire Games? Then it would meet the primary objectives of the organization, if the tone is acceptable or tolerable. If there is no wish to have the mod reviewed by Wildfire Games, then the claimed purposes of the thread would be less relevant. The discussion usually would take place on Phabricator, where a specific coherent feature would be taken out of the mod and analyzed for their impact on the game. If this discussion would be on Phabricator, there at least wouldn't be a discussion as to whether a review of the features makes sense or not. If I had finalized some dedication to a software repository decision we'd also have a different discussion. @Loki1950 say the line!
  23. (Added 7zip compression -> 90% ratio, also fixed the backup scripts with user1)
  • Create New...