rails-devel — List for discussion of Rails development

Re: [Rails-devel] 1835 presidency swap: Bug fix required

[Schnell, V. <vol...@ar...>]

Hi Stefan,

below my opinions:
First: the Exchange of shares takes place after the share selling to the 
Bankpool.
Second: in the Bankpool can hold 50% of the Shares. (2.6.3.2) and each 
paper can be sold only as whole one (i.e.  20% Paper  as 1 Paper)


Am 21.08.2015 um 22:18 schrieb Stefan Frey:
> Another 1835 implementation issue:
>
> President swaps are not easy to understand for newbies in any 18xx 
> (you are not allowed to sell the president share, however you are 
> allowed to tear it apart, virtually sell one half of it to the pool 
> and then receive two shares by the new director, who gets the fixed 
> director certificate, then the old director puts one of received 
> shares into the pool and keeps the other).
>
> In 1835 the 20% shares make selling the presidency even more interesting.
>
> Selling the president certificate involves two steps of share movements:
>
> A) Exchange the president certificate with shares from the new president
>
> B) Move the remaining sold shares into the pool
>
> In 1835 both steps could include either 10% or 20% shares (PR: 5% or 
> 10% shares)
>
> Depending on what the president received in A) this might even change 
> the possible options for B.
>
> However it implies that the current president has to choose both A) 
> which certificate to exchange with the new president and B) which 
> certificate to put into the pool.
>
> The current implementation only asks for A) and has some serious bugs 
> in executing the share transfers.
>
> I intend to fix those bugs before the next release, however I would 
> ask if anyone has a different opinion on how it works for 1835?
>
> Example:
>
> In the attached save file OL has the following share distribution:
>
> (Remark: this is from a replay of one of Bill Stoll's 1835 pbem games 
> - see http://askwaltstollmd.com/bill/archive/1835zwolf/index.html
> Fun fact is that I played 1835 ftf with one of the players before he 
> moved to the US)
>
> Eyal: 50% (1 20% director, 1 20% share, 1 10% share)
> Marco: 40% (1 20% share, 2 10% share)
> Nick: 10% (1 10% share)
>
> What are the possible scenarios for Eyal to sell his directorship?
>
> ** Eyal selling 20% of shares:
>
> - Receiving 1 20% share from Marco-
> - Putting 1 20% share into the Pool
> Eyal ends up with 1 20% share, 1 10% share
> Marco ends up with 1 20% director, 2 10% shares
> Pool ends up with 1 20% share
>
> - Receiving 2 10% share from Marco
> - Putting 1 20% share into the Pool
> Eyal ends up with 3 10% share
> Marco ends up with 1 20% director, 1 20% share
> Pool ends up with 1 20% share
>
> - Receiving 2 10% share from Marco
> - Putting 2 10% share into the Pool
Not possible, because the Exchange of shares takes place after the share 
selling to the Bankpool.
>
> Eyal ends up with 3 10% share
> Marco ends up with 1 20% director, 1 20% share
> Pool ends up with 2 10% share
>
> There are similar cases for 30%, 40% and 50% selling of shares.
>
> Some special (hypothetical) cases:
>
> A) No shares in Pool
>
> Eyal: 40% (20%P + 20%)
> Marco: 20% (20%)
>
> IPO: 40% (4 10%)
>
> Is it possible for Eyal to sell 30%?
Not possible, because the Exchange of shares takes place after the share 
selling to the Bankpool. The Bank Pools always ends up with  1 20% Share
One way is possible: buying a 10% Share from the pool and selling the 
20% Share.
> Answer: No, as it not possible to get a 10% share out of IPO to Eyal.
> Eyal has to sell all 40%.
>
> B) 10% shares in Pool
>
> Eyal: 40% (20%P + 20%)
> Marco: 20% (20%)
>
> Pool: 40% (4 10%)
Not possible, because the Exchange of shares takes place after the share 
selling to the Bankpool. The Bank Pools always ends up with  1 20% Share
> Is it possible for Eyal to sell 30%?
> Answer: Likely yes? Is it possible for Eyal to swap the received 20% 
> share from Marco with a 10% of the Pool?

-- 
Volker Schnell
email: vol...@ar...
homepage: home.arcor.de\volker_schnell

Re: [Rails-devel] 1835 presidency swap: Bug fix required (typos corrected)

[<da...@mi...>]

 

I have long since given up on the notion that Games Designers/ Rules
Writers can write in their native tongue as concisely as we must
program. 

Dave. 

On 2015-08-22 08:09, Erik Vos wrote: 

>> -----Original Message----- From: John David Galt [mailto:jd...@di...]
> 
>> Eyal may also sell 10%. In this case he just places his 20% non-president certificate in the bank pool and takes a 10% certificate.
> 
> Apparently you follow the line, that 1835 players buy certificates and sell
> shares, both understood as referring to the current common sense meaning of
> the words certificate and share.
> 
> I don't believe that the (old) rules as written follow this strict
> distinction. In some places, the English rules seem to support your view, in
> other places I find it pretty clear that the word 'share' should actually be
> understood as 'certificate'. 
> The word 'certificate' as used in the English rules only seems to occur in
> contexts where minors and privates are included as well.
> 
> The German rules (found on BGG) state in 2.6.3.2:
> "Jedes "Papier" kann nur als Ganzes verkauft werden, nicht teilweise (z.B.
> durch den Austausch einer 20%-Aktie durch einen 10%-Anteil)."
> " Each certificate can only be sold as a whole, not in parts (e.g. by
> swapping a 20% share for a 10% share)."
> 
> That seems pretty clear to me. If Rails would ever support your way, it
> should in my opinion be a non-default game option.
> 
> Erik
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Rails-devel mailing list
> Rai...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel [1]
 

Links:
------
[1] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel

Re: [Rails-devel] 1835 presidency swap: Bug fix required (typos corrected)

[Erik V. <eri...@xs...>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: John David Galt [mailto:jd...@di...]

> Eyal may also sell 10%.  In this case he just places his 20% non-president
> certificate in the bank pool and takes a 10% certificate.

Apparently you follow the line, that 1835 players buy certificates and sell
shares, both understood as referring to the current common sense meaning of
the words certificate and share.

I don't believe that the (old) rules as written follow this strict
distinction. In some places, the English rules seem to support your view, in
other places I find it pretty clear that the word 'share' should actually be
understood as 'certificate'. 
The word 'certificate' as used in the English rules only seems to occur in
contexts where minors and privates are included as well.

The German rules (found on BGG) state in 2.6.3.2:
"Jedes "Papier" kann nur als Ganzes verkauft werden, nicht teilweise (z.B.
durch den Austausch einer 20%-Aktie durch einen 10%-Anteil)."
" Each certificate can only be sold as a whole, not in parts (e.g. by
swapping a 20% share for a 10% share)."

That seems pretty clear to me. If Rails would ever support your way, it
should in my opinion be a non-default game option.

Erik

[Rails-devel] 1844 and 1854 Tunnel Tile setup and handling

[Dr. M. B. <dr....@t-...>]

Good morning,

how do we want to handle the Tunnel Tiles and their ability in 1844 to 
be added on top or below other tiles already on the board ?

For 1844 one could build additional tiles (since only the 
Furka-Oberalp-Tiles not on the board itself can be tunneled additionaly 
before or after the FOs have been placed).

But in 1854 this is a bit more complex. Any ideas ?

Regards,
Martin

Re: [Rails-devel] 1835 presidency swap: Bug fix required (typos corrected)

[John D. G. <jd...@di...>]

Please use this version, I hit send too soon.

On 2015-08-21 13:18, Stefan Frey wrote:
> Another 1835 implementation issue:
> 
> President swaps are not easy to understand for newbies in any 18xx (you
> are not allowed to sell the president share, however you are allowed to
> tear it apart, virtually sell one half of it to the pool and then
> receive two shares by the new director, who gets the fixed director
> certificate, then the old director puts one of received shares into the
> pool and keeps the other).
> 
> In 1835 the 20% shares make selling the presidency even more interesting.
> 
> Selling the president certificate involves two steps of share movements:
> 
> A) Exchange the president certificate with shares from the new president
> 
> B) Move the remaining sold shares into the pool

I do not agree that these are separate steps.

> In 1835 both steps could include either 10% or 20% shares (PR: 5% or 10%
> shares)
> 
> Depending on what the president received in A) this might even change
> the possible options for B.
> 
> However it implies that the current president has to choose both A)
> which certificate to exchange with the new president and B) which
> certificate to put into the pool.
> 
> The current implementation only asks for A) and has some serious bugs in
> executing the share transfers.
> 
> I intend to fix those bugs before the next release, however I would ask
> if anyone has a different opinion on how it works for 1835?

I have not seen any case in which the current program gets it wrong (in
my view) -- however, I have not exhaustively tried every single case.

The following is the exact sequence of events I expect to happen in any
purchase or sale of stock (after any starting packet).  This applies to
all games, not just 1835.

In a purchase of stock:

(1) The player buys a certificate, not share(s).

(2) If the purchase causes a change of president, then the new president
exchanges one or more certificates (totaling the same number of shares
of that company) for the president's certificate, wherever it is.  (This
is a direct exchange between two players, unless the president's
certificate is in the bank pool, as it might be in 1829 (receivership)
or 1853v1 (when the company hasn't floated yet).)

(In 1835, if there is a choice, the outgoing president chooses which
certificate(s) he receives from among those in the new president's hand.
 I would follow this principle in any other game where any company has
non-presidential certificates of more than one size, if the rules do not
address the question.)

In a sale of stock:

(1) A sale that is going to cause a change of president may only be made
if some other player holds at least the number of shares that the
president's certificate contains.

(2) Except for the special case given in point (5), the player sells
certificate(s), not share(s).

(3) If the sale will cause a change of president, then one of the
certificate(s) sold must be the president's certificate.  Otherwise the
seller must retain the president's certificate.

(4) If the sale causes a change of presidency, then the new president
exchanges one or more certificates (totaling the same number of shares
of that company) for the president's certificate in the bank pool.  (The
outgoing president does not participate in this swap and does not have
any right to claim a certificate from the new president's hand.)

(5) A special case is where a player who holds only certificate(s) of
two or more shares each in that company wishes to sell a number or
shares that is not divisible by one of his certificates.  (For this
purpose "one share" is defined as the amount of the smallest certificate
that exists for that company.)

In this case the "fractional sale" may only be made if one of the
following is true in addition to point (1):

   A: The bank pool contains certificate(s) of the company in the right
sizes such that the seller can be given the correct number of shares
from the bank pool.  In this case the seller exchanges certificates with
the bank pool, and then point (4) applies.

   B: Statement A above is not true, but, the sale will cause a change
of presidency, and the bank pool and the old and new presidents' hands
together contain enough certificates of the company to give both the old
and new presidents the correct numbers of shares, with the new president
holding the president's certificate.  In this case a three-way swap of
certificates is performed.  If there is more than one correct way to
perform the swap, first the outgoing president chooses which
certificate(s) he gives up; then the new president chooses which
certificate(s) he gives up.

> Example:
> 
> In the attached save file OL has the following share distribution:
> 
> (Remark: this is from a replay of one of Bill Stoll's 1835 pbem games -
> see http://askwaltstollmd.com/bill/archive/1835zwolf/index.html
> Fun fact is that I played 1835 ftf with one of the players before he
> moved to the US)
> 
> Eyal: 50% (1 20% director, 1 20% share, 1 10% share)
> Marco: 40% (1 20% share, 2 10% share)
> Nick: 10% (1 10% share)
> 
> What are the possible scenarios for Eyal to sell his directorship?

If Eyal sells 10% (which does not change the presidency), he just moves
his 10% certificate to the bank pool.  Done.

If Eyal sells 20%, he moves the president's certificate to the bank
pool.  Then Marco takes it and chooses 20% (either one 20% or two 10%
certificates) to place in the bank pool.

If Eyal sells 30%, he moves the president's certificate and the 10%
certificate to the bank pool.  Then Marco takes the president's
certificate and chooses 20% (either one 20% or two 10% certificates) to
place in the bank pool.

If Eyal sells 40%, he moves the president's certificate and the 20%
certificate to the bank pool.  Then Marco takes the president's
certificate and chooses 20% (either one 20% or two 10% certificates) to
place in the bank pool.

If Eyal sells 50%, he moves all three of his certificates to the bank
pool.  Then Marco takes the president's certificate and chooses 20%
(either one 20% or two 10% certificates) to place in the bank pool.

[snip]
> Some special (hypothetical) cases:
> 
> A) No shares in Pool
> 
> Eyal: 40% (20%P + 20%)
> Marco: 20% (20%)
> 
> IPO: 40% (4 10%)
> 
> Is it possible for Eyal to sell 30%?
> Answer: No, as it not possible to get a 10% share out of IPO to Eyal.
> Eyal has to sell all 40%.

Agreed.

> B) 10% shares in Pool
> 
> Eyal: 40% (20%P + 20%)
> Marco: 20% (20%)
> 
> Pool: 40% (4 10%)
> 
> Is it possible for Eyal to sell 30%?
> Answer: Likely yes? Is it possible for Eyal to swap the received 20%
> share from Marco with a 10% of the Pool?

In most games (and I think this includes 1835), Eyal is prevented from
selling 30% because this would cause 70% to be in the bank pool.

But let's change the example by having the pool hold two 10%
certificates and a third player hold the other two.  Then Eyal may sell
30% by placing both his certificates in the bank pool and taking a 10%
certificate from the bank pool.  Marco must then trade his 20%
certificate for the president's certificate.

Eyal may also sell 10%.  In this case he just places his 20%
non-president certificate in the bank pool and takes a 10% certificate.

-end-

Re: [Rails-devel] 1835 presidency swap: Bug fix required

[John D. G. <jd...@di...>]

On 2015-08-21 13:18, Stefan Frey wrote:
> Another 1835 implementation issue:
> 
> President swaps are not easy to understand for newbies in any 18xx (you
> are not allowed to sell the president share, however you are allowed to
> tear it apart, virtually sell one half of it to the pool and then
> receive two shares by the new director, who gets the fixed director
> certificate, then the old director puts one of received shares into the
> pool and keeps the other).
> 
> In 1835 the 20% shares make selling the presidency even more interesting.
> 
> Selling the president certificate involves two steps of share movements:
> 
> A) Exchange the president certificate with shares from the new president
> 
> B) Move the remaining sold shares into the pool

I do not agree that these are separate steps.

> In 1835 both steps could include either 10% or 20% shares (PR: 5% or 10%
> shares)
> 
> Depending on what the president received in A) this might even change
> the possible options for B.
> 
> However it implies that the current president has to choose both A)
> which certificate to exchange with the new president and B) which
> certificate to put into the pool.
> 
> The current implementation only asks for A) and has some serious bugs in
> executing the share transfers.
> 
> I intend to fix those bugs before the next release, however I would ask
> if anyone has a different opinion on how it works for 1835?

I have not seen any case in which the current program gets it wrong (in
my view) -- however, I have not exhaustively tried every single case.

The following is the exact sequence of events I expect to happen in any
purchase or sale of stock (after any starting packet).  This applies to
all games, not just 1835.

In a purchase of stock:

(1) The player buys a certificate, not share(s).

(2) If the purchase causes a change of president, then the new president
exchanges one or more certificates (totaling the same number of shares
of that company) for the president's certificate, wherever it is.  (This
is a direct exchange between two players, unless the president's
certificate is in the bank pool, as it might be in 1829 (receivership)
or 1853v1 (when the company hasn't floated yet).)

(In 1835, if there is a choice, the outgoing president chooses which
certificate(s) he receives from among those in the new president's hand.
 I would follow this principle in any other game where any company has
non-presidential certificates of more than one size, if the rules do not
address the question.)

In a sale of stock:

(1) A sale that is going to cause a change of president may only be made
if some other player holds at least the number of shares that the
president's certificate contains.

(2) Except for the special case given in point (5), the player sells
certificate(s), not share(s).

(3) If the sale will cause a change of president, then one of the
certificate(s) sold must be the president's certificate.  Otherwise the
seller must retain the president's certificate.

(4) If the sale causes a change of presidency, then the new president
exchanges one or more certificates (totaling the same number of shares
of that company) for the president's certificate in the bank pool.  (The
outgoing president does not participate in this swap and does not have
any right to claim a certificate from the new president's hand.)

(5) A special case is where a player who holds only certificate(s) of
two or more shares each in that company wishes to sell a number or
shares smaller than one of his certificates.  (For this purpose "one
share" is defined as the amount of the smallest certificate that exists
for that company.)

In this case the "fractional sale" may only be made if one of the
following is true in addition to point (3):

   A: The bank pool contains certificate(s) of the company in the right
sizes such that the seller can be given the correct number of shares
from the bank pool.  In this case the seller exchanges certificates with
the bank pool, and then point (4) applies.

   B: Statement A above is not true, but, the sale will cause a change
of presidency, and the bank pool and the old and new presidents' hands
together contain enough certificates of the company to give both the old
and new presidents the correct numbers of shares, with the new president
holding the president's certificate.  In this case a three-way swap of
certificates is performed.  If there is more than one correct way to
perform the swap, first the outgoing president chooses which
certificate(s) he gives up; then the new president chooses which
certificate(s) he gives up.

> Example:
> 
> In the attached save file OL has the following share distribution:
> 
> (Remark: this is from a replay of one of Bill Stoll's 1835 pbem games -
> see http://askwaltstollmd.com/bill/archive/1835zwolf/index.html
> Fun fact is that I played 1835 ftf with one of the players before he
> moved to the US)
> 
> Eyal: 50% (1 20% director, 1 20% share, 1 10% share)
> Marco: 40% (1 20% share, 2 10% share)
> Nick: 10% (1 10% share)
> 
> What are the possible scenarios for Eyal to sell his directorship?

If Eyal sells 10% (which does not change the presidency), he just moves
his 10% certificate to the bank pool.  Done.

If Eyal sells 20%, he moves the president's certificate to the bank
pool.  Then Marco takes it and chooses 20% (either one 20% or two 10%
certificates) to place in the bank pool.

If Eyal sells 30%, he moves the president's certificate and the 10%
certificate to the bank pool.  Then Marco takes the president's
certificate and chooses 20% (either one 20% or two 10% certificates) to
place in the bank pool.

If Eyal sells 40%, he moves the president's certificate and the 20%
certificate to the bank pool.  Then Marco takes the president's
certificate and chooses 20% (either one 20% or two 10% certificates) to
place in the bank pool.

If Eyal sells 50%, he moves all three of his certificates to the bank
pool.  Then Marco takes the president's certificate and chooses 20%
(either one 20% or two 10% certificates) to place in the bank pool.

[snip]
> Some special (hypothetical) cases:
> 
> A) No shares in Pool
> 
> Eyal: 40% (20%P + 20%)
> Marco: 20% (20%)
> 
> IPO: 40% (4 10%)
> 
> Is it possible for Eyal to sell 30%?
> Answer: No, as it not possible to get a 10% share out of IPO to Eyal.
> Eyal has to sell all 40%.

Agreed.

> B) 10% shares in Pool
> 
> Eyal: 40% (20%P + 20%)
> Marco: 20% (20%)
> 
> Pool: 40% (4 10%)
> 
> Is it possible for Eyal to sell 30%?
> Answer: Likely yes? Is it possible for Eyal to swap the received 20%
> share from Marco with a 10% of the Pool?

Eyal may sell 30% by placing both his certificates in the bank pool and
taking a 10% certificate from the bank pool.  Marco must then trade his
20% certificate for the president's certificate.

Eyal may also sell 10%.  In this case he just places his 20%
non-president certificate in the bank pool and takes a 10% certificate.

-end-

[Rails-devel] 1835 presidency swap: Bug fix required

[Stefan F. <ste...@we...>]

Another 1835 implementation issue:

President swaps are not easy to understand for newbies in any 18xx (you 
are not allowed to sell the president share, however you are allowed to 
tear it apart, virtually sell one half of it to the pool and then 
receive two shares by the new director, who gets the fixed director 
certificate, then the old director puts one of received shares into the 
pool and keeps the other).

In 1835 the 20% shares make selling the presidency even more interesting.

Selling the president certificate involves two steps of share movements:

A) Exchange the president certificate with shares from the new president

B) Move the remaining sold shares into the pool

In 1835 both steps could include either 10% or 20% shares (PR: 5% or 10% 
shares)

Depending on what the president received in A) this might even change 
the possible options for B.

However it implies that the current president has to choose both A) 
which certificate to exchange with the new president and B) which 
certificate to put into the pool.

The current implementation only asks for A) and has some serious bugs in 
executing the share transfers.

I intend to fix those bugs before the next release, however I would ask 
if anyone has a different opinion on how it works for 1835?

Example:

In the attached save file OL has the following share distribution:

(Remark: this is from a replay of one of Bill Stoll's 1835 pbem games - 
see http://askwaltstollmd.com/bill/archive/1835zwolf/index.html
Fun fact is that I played 1835 ftf with one of the players before he 
moved to the US)

Eyal: 50% (1 20% director, 1 20% share, 1 10% share)
Marco: 40% (1 20% share, 2 10% share)
Nick: 10% (1 10% share)

What are the possible scenarios for Eyal to sell his directorship?

** Eyal selling 20% of shares:

- Receiving 1 20% share from Marco-
- Putting 1 20% share into the Pool
Eyal ends up with 1 20% share, 1 10% share
Marco ends up with 1 20% director, 2 10% shares
Pool ends up with 1 20% share

- Receiving 2 10% share from Marco
- Putting 1 20% share into the Pool
Eyal ends up with 3 10% share
Marco ends up with 1 20% director, 1 20% share
Pool ends up with 1 20% share

- Receiving 2 10% share from Marco
- Putting 2 10% share into the Pool
Eyal ends up with 3 10% share
Marco ends up with 1 20% director, 1 20% share
Pool ends up with 2 10% share

There are similar cases for 30%, 40% and 50% selling of shares.

Some special (hypothetical) cases:

A) No shares in Pool

Eyal: 40% (20%P + 20%)
Marco: 20% (20%)

IPO: 40% (4 10%)

Is it possible for Eyal to sell 30%?
Answer: No, as it not possible to get a 10% share out of IPO to Eyal.
Eyal has to sell all 40%.

B) 10% shares in Pool

Eyal: 40% (20%P + 20%)
Marco: 20% (20%)

Pool: 40% (4 10%)

Is it possible for Eyal to sell 30%?
Answer: Likely yes? Is it possible for Eyal to swap the received 20% 
share from Marco with a 10% of the Pool?

Re: [Rails-devel] Move to github

[Dr. M. B. <dr....@t-...>]

Mine is https://github.com/neutronc as someone should know :)

Am 21.08.15 um 18:39 schrieb brett lentz:
> This is me: https://github.com/blentz
>
>
> ---Brett.
>
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 12:16 PM, Stefan Frey <ste...@we... 
> <mailto:ste...@we...>> wrote:
>
>     I need your github usernames to add you as collaborators.
>     Brett, Erik, Martin, Michael, anyone else?
>
>     Let us make the move at the time of the official Rails 2.0 release,
>     which is most likely very soon ;-)
>
>
>
>     On 08/21/2015 06:02 PM, brett lentz wrote:
>     > Sweet! Let's make the jump!
>     >
>     > ---Brett.
>     >
>     > On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 11:57 AM, Stefan Frey
>     <ste...@we... <mailto:ste...@we...>
>     > <mailto:ste...@we... <mailto:ste...@we...>>> wrote:
>     >
>     >     Okay, I have no strong opinion on that, as I use Linux
>     myself and prefer
>     >     jar/webstart ;-)
>     >
>     >     Another topic: I realized recently that github now supports
>     binary
>     >     releases, so a full move to github is possible.
>     >
>     >     Stefan
>     >
>     >
>     >     On 08/21/2015 03:15 PM, brett lentz wrote:
>     >     >
>     >     > Let's continue with launch4j and MacAppBundle.
>     >     >
>     >     > I'd like to keep Rails entirely open source.
>     >     >
>     >     > ---Brett.
>     >     >
>     >     > On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 5:38 AM, Stefan Frey
>     <ste...@we... <mailto:ste...@we...>
>     <mailto:ste...@we... <mailto:ste...@we...>>
>     >      > <mailto:ste...@we... <mailto:ste...@we...>
>     <mailto:ste...@we... <mailto:ste...@we...>>>> wrote:
>     >      >
>     >      >     For the next beta/RC I will add test files that are
>     created
>     >     by Install4j
>     >      >
>     >     
>      (https://www.ej-technologies.com/products/install4j/overview.html).
>     >      >
>     >      >     Install4j is a commercial product, however offers free
>     >     licenses for
>     >      >     OpenSource projects for a link on the homepage. I
>     hope that
>     >     is okay for
>     >      >     Rails (Brett?).
>     >      >
>     >      >     Install4j would provide an installer for both native
>     >     Windows/Mac OS.
>     >      >
>     >      >     I have not received any feedback on the launch4j
>     >     wrapper/installer so
>     >      >     far. As there have been some downloads, I assume that
>     is a
>     >     good sign.
>     >      >
>     >      >     In addition I intend to test a Mac OS bundle created by
>     >     MacAppBundle
>     >      > https://github.com/crotwell/gradle-macappbundle
>     >      >
>     >      >     So either there will be packages by
>     >      >     * launch4j and macappbundle
>     >      >     or
>     >      >     * install4j
>     >      >
>     >      >     That is in addition to the existing one-jar release
>     and Webstart
>     >      >     support.
>     >      >
>     >      >     A big thanks to gradle that allows supporting all of that
>     >     with much more
>     >      >     ease than ever before. :-)
>     >      >
>     >      >     Stefan
>     >      >
>     >      >
>     >
>      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>     >      >  _______________________________________________
>     >      >     Rails-devel mailing list
>     >      > Rai...@li...
>     <mailto:Rai...@li...>
>     >     <mailto:Rai...@li...
>     <mailto:Rai...@li...>>
>     >      >     <mailto:Rai...@li...
>     <mailto:Rai...@li...>
>     >     <mailto:Rai...@li...
>     <mailto:Rai...@li...>>>
>     >      > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
>     >      >
>     >      >
>     >      >
>     >      >
>     >      >
>     >
>      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>     >      >
>     >      >
>     >      >
>     >      > _______________________________________________
>     >      > Rails-devel mailing list
>     >      > Rai...@li...
>     <mailto:Rai...@li...>
>     >     <mailto:Rai...@li...
>     <mailto:Rai...@li...>>
>     >      > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
>     >      >
>     >
>     >
>      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>     >     _______________________________________________
>     >     Rails-devel mailing list
>     > Rai...@li...
>     <mailto:Rai...@li...>
>     >     <mailto:Rai...@li...
>     <mailto:Rai...@li...>>
>     > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     > _______________________________________________
>     > Rails-devel mailing list
>     > Rai...@li...
>     <mailto:Rai...@li...>
>     > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
>     >
>
>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>     _______________________________________________
>     Rails-devel mailing list
>     Rai...@li...
>     <mailto:Rai...@li...>
>     https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rails-devel mailing list
> Rai...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel

Re: [Rails-devel] Move to github (was: Test of Install4j and MacAppBundle in the next Beta/RC)

[brett l. <bre...@gm...>]

This is me: https://github.com/blentz


---Brett.

On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 12:16 PM, Stefan Frey <ste...@we...> wrote:

> I need your github usernames to add you as collaborators.
> Brett, Erik, Martin, Michael, anyone else?
>
> Let us make the move at the time of the official Rails 2.0 release,
> which is most likely very soon ;-)
>
>
>
> On 08/21/2015 06:02 PM, brett lentz wrote:
> > Sweet! Let's make the jump!
> >
> > ---Brett.
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 11:57 AM, Stefan Frey <ste...@we...
> > <mailto:ste...@we...>> wrote:
> >
> >     Okay, I have no strong opinion on that, as I use Linux myself and
> prefer
> >     jar/webstart ;-)
> >
> >     Another topic: I realized recently that github now supports binary
> >     releases, so a full move to github is possible.
> >
> >     Stefan
> >
> >
> >     On 08/21/2015 03:15 PM, brett lentz wrote:
> >     >
> >     > Let's continue with launch4j and MacAppBundle.
> >     >
> >     > I'd like to keep Rails entirely open source.
> >     >
> >     > ---Brett.
> >     >
> >     > On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 5:38 AM, Stefan Frey <ste...@we...
> <mailto:ste...@we...>
> >      > <mailto:ste...@we... <mailto:ste...@we...>>> wrote:
> >      >
> >      >     For the next beta/RC I will add test files that are created
> >     by Install4j
> >      >
> >       (https://www.ej-technologies.com/products/install4j/overview.html
> ).
> >      >
> >      >     Install4j is a commercial product, however offers free
> >     licenses for
> >      >     OpenSource projects for a link on the homepage. I hope that
> >     is okay for
> >      >     Rails (Brett?).
> >      >
> >      >     Install4j would provide an installer for both native
> >     Windows/Mac OS.
> >      >
> >      >     I have not received any feedback on the launch4j
> >     wrapper/installer so
> >      >     far. As there have been some downloads, I assume that is a
> >     good sign.
> >      >
> >      >     In addition I intend to test a Mac OS bundle created by
> >     MacAppBundle
> >      > https://github.com/crotwell/gradle-macappbundle
> >      >
> >      >     So either there will be packages by
> >      >     * launch4j and macappbundle
> >      >     or
> >      >     * install4j
> >      >
> >      >     That is in addition to the existing one-jar release and
> Webstart
> >      >     support.
> >      >
> >      >     A big thanks to gradle that allows supporting all of that
> >     with much more
> >      >     ease than ever before. :-)
> >      >
> >      >     Stefan
> >      >
> >      >
> >
>  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >      >     _______________________________________________
> >      >     Rails-devel mailing list
> >      > Rai...@li...
> >     <mailto:Rai...@li...>
> >      >     <mailto:Rai...@li...
> >     <mailto:Rai...@li...>>
> >      > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
> >      >
> >      >
> >      >
> >      >
> >      >
> >
>  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >      >
> >      >
> >      >
> >      > _______________________________________________
> >      > Rails-devel mailing list
> >      > Rai...@li...
> >     <mailto:Rai...@li...>
> >      > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
> >      >
> >
> >
>  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >     _______________________________________________
> >     Rails-devel mailing list
> >     Rai...@li...
> >     <mailto:Rai...@li...>
> >     https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Rails-devel mailing list
> > Rai...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Rails-devel mailing list
> Rai...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
>

Re: [Rails-devel] Move to github (was: Test of Install4j and MacAppBundle in the next Beta/RC)

[Chris S. <chr...@gm...>]

ChrisTheCat

On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 9:16 AM Stefan Frey <ste...@we...> wrote:

> I need your github usernames to add you as collaborators.
> Brett, Erik, Martin, Michael, anyone else?
>
> Let us make the move at the time of the official Rails 2.0 release,
> which is most likely very soon ;-)
>
>
>
> On 08/21/2015 06:02 PM, brett lentz wrote:
> > Sweet! Let's make the jump!
> >
> > ---Brett.
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 11:57 AM, Stefan Frey <ste...@we...
> > <mailto:ste...@we...>> wrote:
> >
> >     Okay, I have no strong opinion on that, as I use Linux myself and
> prefer
> >     jar/webstart ;-)
> >
> >     Another topic: I realized recently that github now supports binary
> >     releases, so a full move to github is possible.
> >
> >     Stefan
> >
> >
> >     On 08/21/2015 03:15 PM, brett lentz wrote:
> >     >
> >     > Let's continue with launch4j and MacAppBundle.
> >     >
> >     > I'd like to keep Rails entirely open source.
> >     >
> >     > ---Brett.
> >     >
> >     > On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 5:38 AM, Stefan Frey <ste...@we...
> <mailto:ste...@we...>
> >      > <mailto:ste...@we... <mailto:ste...@we...>>> wrote:
> >      >
> >      >     For the next beta/RC I will add test files that are created
> >     by Install4j
> >      >
> >       (https://www.ej-technologies.com/products/install4j/overview.html
> ).
> >      >
> >      >     Install4j is a commercial product, however offers free
> >     licenses for
> >      >     OpenSource projects for a link on the homepage. I hope that
> >     is okay for
> >      >     Rails (Brett?).
> >      >
> >      >     Install4j would provide an installer for both native
> >     Windows/Mac OS.
> >      >
> >      >     I have not received any feedback on the launch4j
> >     wrapper/installer so
> >      >     far. As there have been some downloads, I assume that is a
> >     good sign.
> >      >
> >      >     In addition I intend to test a Mac OS bundle created by
> >     MacAppBundle
> >      > https://github.com/crotwell/gradle-macappbundle
> >      >
> >      >     So either there will be packages by
> >      >     * launch4j and macappbundle
> >      >     or
> >      >     * install4j
> >      >
> >      >     That is in addition to the existing one-jar release and
> Webstart
> >      >     support.
> >      >
> >      >     A big thanks to gradle that allows supporting all of that
> >     with much more
> >      >     ease than ever before. :-)
> >      >
> >      >     Stefan
> >      >
> >      >
> >
>  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >      >     _______________________________________________
> >      >     Rails-devel mailing list
> >      > Rai...@li...
> >     <mailto:Rai...@li...>
> >      >     <mailto:Rai...@li...
> >     <mailto:Rai...@li...>>
> >      > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
> >      >
> >      >
> >      >
> >      >
> >      >
> >
>  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >      >
> >      >
> >      >
> >      > _______________________________________________
> >      > Rails-devel mailing list
> >      > Rai...@li...
> >     <mailto:Rai...@li...>
> >      > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
> >      >
> >
> >
>  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >     _______________________________________________
> >     Rails-devel mailing list
> >     Rai...@li...
> >     <mailto:Rai...@li...>
> >     https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Rails-devel mailing list
> > Rai...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Rails-devel mailing list
> Rai...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
>

[Rails-devel] Move to github (was: Test of Install4j and MacAppBundle in the next Beta/RC)

[Stefan F. <ste...@we...>]

I need your github usernames to add you as collaborators.
Brett, Erik, Martin, Michael, anyone else?

Let us make the move at the time of the official Rails 2.0 release, 
which is most likely very soon ;-)



On 08/21/2015 06:02 PM, brett lentz wrote:
> Sweet! Let's make the jump!
>
> ---Brett.
>
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 11:57 AM, Stefan Frey <ste...@we...
> <mailto:ste...@we...>> wrote:
>
>     Okay, I have no strong opinion on that, as I use Linux myself and prefer
>     jar/webstart ;-)
>
>     Another topic: I realized recently that github now supports binary
>     releases, so a full move to github is possible.
>
>     Stefan
>
>
>     On 08/21/2015 03:15 PM, brett lentz wrote:
>     >
>     > Let's continue with launch4j and MacAppBundle.
>     >
>     > I'd like to keep Rails entirely open source.
>     >
>     > ---Brett.
>     >
>     > On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 5:38 AM, Stefan Frey <ste...@we... <mailto:ste...@we...>
>      > <mailto:ste...@we... <mailto:ste...@we...>>> wrote:
>      >
>      >     For the next beta/RC I will add test files that are created
>     by Install4j
>      >
>       (https://www.ej-technologies.com/products/install4j/overview.html).
>      >
>      >     Install4j is a commercial product, however offers free
>     licenses for
>      >     OpenSource projects for a link on the homepage. I hope that
>     is okay for
>      >     Rails (Brett?).
>      >
>      >     Install4j would provide an installer for both native
>     Windows/Mac OS.
>      >
>      >     I have not received any feedback on the launch4j
>     wrapper/installer so
>      >     far. As there have been some downloads, I assume that is a
>     good sign.
>      >
>      >     In addition I intend to test a Mac OS bundle created by
>     MacAppBundle
>      > https://github.com/crotwell/gradle-macappbundle
>      >
>      >     So either there will be packages by
>      >     * launch4j and macappbundle
>      >     or
>      >     * install4j
>      >
>      >     That is in addition to the existing one-jar release and Webstart
>      >     support.
>      >
>      >     A big thanks to gradle that allows supporting all of that
>     with much more
>      >     ease than ever before. :-)
>      >
>      >     Stefan
>      >
>      >
>       ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>      >     _______________________________________________
>      >     Rails-devel mailing list
>      > Rai...@li...
>     <mailto:Rai...@li...>
>      >     <mailto:Rai...@li...
>     <mailto:Rai...@li...>>
>      > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
>      >
>      >
>      >
>      >
>      >
>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>      >
>      >
>      >
>      > _______________________________________________
>      > Rails-devel mailing list
>      > Rai...@li...
>     <mailto:Rai...@li...>
>      > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
>      >
>
>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>     _______________________________________________
>     Rails-devel mailing list
>     Rai...@li...
>     <mailto:Rai...@li...>
>     https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rails-devel mailing list
> Rai...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
>

Re: [Rails-devel] Test of Install4j and MacAppBundle in the next Beta/RC

[brett l. <bre...@gm...>]

Sweet! Let's make the jump!

---Brett.

On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 11:57 AM, Stefan Frey <ste...@we...> wrote:

> Okay, I have no strong opinion on that, as I use Linux myself and prefer
> jar/webstart ;-)
>
> Another topic: I realized recently that github now supports binary
> releases, so a full move to github is possible.
>
> Stefan
>
>
> On 08/21/2015 03:15 PM, brett lentz wrote:
> >
> > Let's continue with launch4j and MacAppBundle.
> >
> > I'd like to keep Rails entirely open source.
> >
> > ---Brett.
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 5:38 AM, Stefan Frey <ste...@we...
> > <mailto:ste...@we...>> wrote:
> >
> >     For the next beta/RC I will add test files that are created by
> Install4j
> >     (https://www.ej-technologies.com/products/install4j/overview.html).
> >
> >     Install4j is a commercial product, however offers free licenses for
> >     OpenSource projects for a link on the homepage. I hope that is okay
> for
> >     Rails (Brett?).
> >
> >     Install4j would provide an installer for both native Windows/Mac OS.
> >
> >     I have not received any feedback on the launch4j wrapper/installer so
> >     far. As there have been some downloads, I assume that is a good sign.
> >
> >     In addition I intend to test a Mac OS bundle created by MacAppBundle
> >     https://github.com/crotwell/gradle-macappbundle
> >
> >     So either there will be packages by
> >     * launch4j and macappbundle
> >     or
> >     * install4j
> >
> >     That is in addition to the existing one-jar release and Webstart
> >     support.
> >
> >     A big thanks to gradle that allows supporting all of that with much
> more
> >     ease than ever before. :-)
> >
> >     Stefan
> >
> >
>  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >     _______________________________________________
> >     Rails-devel mailing list
> >     Rai...@li...
> >     <mailto:Rai...@li...>
> >     https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Rails-devel mailing list
> > Rai...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Rails-devel mailing list
> Rai...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
>

Re: [Rails-devel] Test of Install4j and MacAppBundle in the next Beta/RC

[Stefan F. <ste...@we...>]

Okay, I have no strong opinion on that, as I use Linux myself and prefer 
jar/webstart ;-)

Another topic: I realized recently that github now supports binary 
releases, so a full move to github is possible.

Stefan


On 08/21/2015 03:15 PM, brett lentz wrote:
>
> Let's continue with launch4j and MacAppBundle.
>
> I'd like to keep Rails entirely open source.
>
> ---Brett.
>
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 5:38 AM, Stefan Frey <ste...@we...
> <mailto:ste...@we...>> wrote:
>
>     For the next beta/RC I will add test files that are created by Install4j
>     (https://www.ej-technologies.com/products/install4j/overview.html).
>
>     Install4j is a commercial product, however offers free licenses for
>     OpenSource projects for a link on the homepage. I hope that is okay for
>     Rails (Brett?).
>
>     Install4j would provide an installer for both native Windows/Mac OS.
>
>     I have not received any feedback on the launch4j wrapper/installer so
>     far. As there have been some downloads, I assume that is a good sign.
>
>     In addition I intend to test a Mac OS bundle created by MacAppBundle
>     https://github.com/crotwell/gradle-macappbundle
>
>     So either there will be packages by
>     * launch4j and macappbundle
>     or
>     * install4j
>
>     That is in addition to the existing one-jar release and Webstart
>     support.
>
>     A big thanks to gradle that allows supporting all of that with much more
>     ease than ever before. :-)
>
>     Stefan
>
>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>     _______________________________________________
>     Rails-devel mailing list
>     Rai...@li...
>     <mailto:Rai...@li...>
>     https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rails-devel mailing list
> Rai...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
>

Re: [Rails-devel] Test of Install4j and MacAppBundle in the next Beta/RC

[brett l. <bre...@gm...>]

Let's continue with launch4j and MacAppBundle.

I'd like to keep Rails entirely open source.

---Brett.

On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 5:38 AM, Stefan Frey <ste...@we...> wrote:

> For the next beta/RC I will add test files that are created by Install4j
> (https://www.ej-technologies.com/products/install4j/overview.html).
>
> Install4j is a commercial product, however offers free licenses for
> OpenSource projects for a link on the homepage. I hope that is okay for
> Rails (Brett?).
>
> Install4j would provide an installer for both native Windows/Mac OS.
>
> I have not received any feedback on the launch4j wrapper/installer so
> far. As there have been some downloads, I assume that is a good sign.
>
> In addition I intend to test a Mac OS bundle created by MacAppBundle
> https://github.com/crotwell/gradle-macappbundle
>
> So either there will be packages by
> * launch4j and macappbundle
> or
> * install4j
>
> That is in addition to the existing one-jar release and Webstart support.
>
> A big thanks to gradle that allows supporting all of that with much more
> ease than ever before. :-)
>
> Stefan
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Rails-devel mailing list
> Rai...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
>

[Rails-devel] Test of Install4j and MacAppBundle in the next Beta/RC

[Stefan F. <ste...@we...>]

For the next beta/RC I will add test files that are created by Install4j 
(https://www.ej-technologies.com/products/install4j/overview.html).

Install4j is a commercial product, however offers free licenses for 
OpenSource projects for a link on the homepage. I hope that is okay for 
Rails (Brett?).

Install4j would provide an installer for both native Windows/Mac OS.

I have not received any feedback on the launch4j wrapper/installer so 
far. As there have been some downloads, I assume that is a good sign.

In addition I intend to test a Mac OS bundle created by MacAppBundle
https://github.com/crotwell/gradle-macappbundle

So either there will be packages by
* launch4j and macappbundle
or
* install4j

That is in addition to the existing one-jar release and Webstart support.

A big thanks to gradle that allows supporting all of that with much more 
ease than ever before. :-)

Stefan

[Rails-devel] Support for special tile and token lays

[Stefan F. <ste...@we...>]

As discussed before (for details see 
https://github.com/freystef/Rails/wiki/PrivatesTileToken) a few changes 
are now implemented for special tile and token lays.

Changes are:

1830 D&H:
Token lay possible only with a tile laid

Remark: Currently it only checks that "any" tile is laid. So the token 
lay would still be possible on a green tile or after a different company 
has laid the tile. However as the rules/interpretations are not clear 
here, I was reluctant to make the code more difficult.

1835 PfB:
Token lay possible only with a tile laid
PfB closes after token lay

Remark: As supported by the 2nd of the rules it does not matter who laid 
the tile. It is even possible to use the PfB tile lay with one company, 
and the PfB token lay with another.

18GA W&S:
The bug that W&S included a tile lay power is removed.

Remark: The token lay is still possible without a tile on the hex.
Next OR it is possible to lay a yellow tile.

1856 WS&R:
Nothing changed, token lay is still possible without a tile on the hex.

To implement this a new attribute to SpecialBaseTokenLay was added: 
requiresTile="yes" implies that a tile has to be laid first before the 
base token can be laid via the special power. Default is "no".

Stefan

[Rails-devel] 18NL supported in Rails 2.0 (now in rails_2_develop)

[Stefan F. <ste...@we...>]

For some time I had used Helmut Ohley's 18NL to test some new code for 
Rails 2.0. I have merged that to rails_2_develop branch and it will be 
released with the next Rails 2.0 beta/RC.

18NL is a 1830 with new map/companies based in the Netherlands.

Only a few code changes were required to support 18NL:

- SpecialTileLays support a "discount" attribute that reduces the cost 
of a tile lay by the amount specified (P#1 in 18NL)

- SpecialBaseTokenLays have a "requiresNoTile" attribute that allows the 
token lay only if there is no tile laid so far (P#2 in 18NL)

- StartItem includes a "reduceable" attribute that indicates that this 
StartItem price is reduced if all players passed. Default is "yes" for 
the first StartItem in a 1830-type auction, otherwise "no". (required 
for P#2 in 18NL, as P#1 does not pay a dividend).

Stefan

[Rails-devel] Rails 2.0 beta 4 available

[Stefan F. <ste...@we...>]

Another beta release for 2.0. Most likely the final one?

A new feature is the support of a windows installer (via launch4j).
Feedback is welcome.

And again a substantial list of bug-fixes, for 1835 and the UI (see list 
below). Also included fixes for 1837 from Martin, which is under 
development.

Stefan

Current Roadmap:
http://github.com/freystef/Rails/wiki/Roadmap


## For Testing: Windows Installer

Download the single exe file and start it directly.

http://sourceforge.net/projects/rails/files/Rails/2.0/

## Availability via Webstart or Download of a single Jar

* Webstart the beta release:

http://rails.sf.net/webstart/rails.jnlp

* Download the beta 3 jar

Download the single jar and start it directly (by double-click or
command line "java -jar" command).

http://sourceforge.net/projects/rails/files/Rails/2.0/

## Fixed UI Bugs
* fixed bug in GameSetupWindow that prevented selection of the next 
player name by mouse
* fixed bug in GameSetupWindow to show options after selection of a 
different game
* Fixed UI problem in StartRoundWindow: did not show the correct info 
text for start items
* Removed stock space coordinates from par prices in Game Status window
* fixed bug that the price for purchased items is not shown in 
StartRound window

## Fixed 1835 bugs:
* Fixed bug that a not yet operating PR is not offered to buy trains from
* Fixed bug that closed company is asked to operate if the company merged
* Changed default (start) variant to Standard from Clemens

Re: [Rails-devel] Playtest report of 1837 under Rails 2.0.beta3

[Dr. M. B. <dr....@t-...>]

Am 01.08.15 um 22:32 schrieb John David Galt:
>
> d) The token (and share chart) color for coal companies should be white,
> and for CL should be black (they are reversed).  The lettering for BK
> should be white (because of its dark background color) and for MS, SB,
> and TH should be black (because of their light background colors).

Has been fixed.
> 3. The square stock chart is what I expected (though I'd like to try
> fixing that as a cosmetic feature for this specific game later).
> However, the Game Status window ought to show the fixed par prices of
> Sd, KK, and Ug right away (and similarly in other games where some
> companies have fixed par prices, even when those shares aren't available
> right after the start round, as they will be in 1837).

has been fixed par prices werent in the config so far.
>
> 4. The "info" hover-buttons on the Start Round window do reveal which
> private companies come with minor companies, but only if you know how to
> read the XML object names.  I think it would be clearer if the buttons
> in the Item column actually said, for example, "SmB+S1" rather than just
> "SmB".  This goes for all games where two certificates are sold or
> auctioned together.

Not yet fixed
>
> 5. The mechanism for reducing prices for the next purchase if everyone
> passes during a start round works correctly -- up to the point where the
> prices of some of the items available reach zero.
>
> The save-game file "1837_20150801_2003_Kermit.rails" demonstrates this
> problem.  Everyone passed consecutively starting with John and ending
> with Kermit, multiple times through.
>
> What actually happened then (from the Game Report window) is:
>
>      (**)Kermit passes.
>      All players have passed.
>      Price of EKT is now reduced to 0K
>      Price of AB is now reduced to 85K
>      Price of ZKB is now reduced to 0K
>      Kermit buys EKT for 0K
>      EKT floats and receives 100K
>
>      And it is still Kermit's turn -- with AB and ZKB available for their
> reduced prices! (but EOD is at its normal price of 100).
>
> What SHOULD have happened is this:
>
>      (**)Kermit passes.
>      All players have passed.
>      Price of EKT is now reduced to 0K
>      Price of AB is now reduced to 85K
>      Price of ZKB is now reduced to 0K
>
>      Now it becomes John's turn.
>      Pass is grayed out, forcing John to buy one of the three companies
> on offer (AB for 85, or EKT or ZKB for free).  Once he does so, all
> prices return to normal, Pass is re-enabled, and it becomes Kent's turn.

Is definately fixed.
>
> 6. When the "first start packet" is sold out, a second one (K1 through
> K3) pops up and becomes available.  However, once all players have too
> little money to buy from that second start packet, the start round ends
> and -- the game hangs.
>
>     The second save file, "1837_20150801_2021_John.rails", is at this point.
>
>     What SHOULD happen next is an operating round.  Only the first start
> packet is required to sell out before operating rounds can begin.

Should have been fixed. Checking now if theres the Startpacket "Coal" 
not sold only to block an OR.

Regards,
Martin

Re: [Rails-devel] Playtest report of 1837 under Rails 2.0.beta3

[Dr. M. B. <dr....@t-...>]

Presumably fixed in the new version :)
Am 18.08.15 um 01:29 schrieb John David Galt:
> No, I checked this in the rules. The next player has to buy something 
> now, but can still select from any column if it is non-empty and he 
> has the cash. 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
> _______________________________________________ Rails-devel mailing 
> list Rai...@li... 
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel 

Re: [Rails-devel] Playtest report of 1837 under Rails 2.0.beta3

[John D. G. <jd...@di...>]

>> 5. The mechanism for reducing prices for the next purchase if everyone
>> passes during a start round works correctly -- up to the point where the
>> prices of some of the items available reach zero.
>>
>> The save-game file "1837_20150801_2003_Kermit.rails" demonstrates this
>> problem.  Everyone passed consecutively starting with John and ending
>> with Kermit, multiple times through.
>>
>> What actually happened then (from the Game Report window) is:
>>
>>      (**)Kermit passes.
>>      All players have passed.
>>      Price of EKT is now reduced to 0K
>>      Price of AB is now reduced to 85K
>>      Price of ZKB is now reduced to 0K
>>      Kermit buys EKT for 0K
>>      EKT floats and receives 100K
>>
>>      And it is still Kermit's turn -- with AB and ZKB available for their
>> reduced prices! (but EOD is at its normal price of 100).
>>
>> What SHOULD have happened is this:
>>
>>      (**)Kermit passes.
>>      All players have passed.
>>      Price of EKT is now reduced to 0K
>>      Price of AB is now reduced to 85K
>>      Price of ZKB is now reduced to 0K
>>
>>      Now it becomes John's turn.
>>      Pass is grayed out, forcing John to buy one of the three companies
>> on offer (AB for 85, or EKT or ZKB for free).  Once he does so, all
>> prices return to normal, Pass is re-enabled, and it becomes Kent's turn.

> Isnt he forced to buy the first one on display thats zero ? (i fixed the 
> behaviour now that he will buy the first unsold company with a zero price.)

No, I checked this in the rules.  The next player has to buy something
now, but can still select from any column if it is non-empty and he has
the cash.

Re: [Rails-devel] 1835 Shareprice of Pru at the End of an SR

[Stefan F. <ste...@we...>]

Martin:
seems to be another mis-understanding, but good to be clear about it.

I was always talking about the second scenario (PR operating, all 4 10% 
shares sold, but not all minors/privates exchanged). The test file from 
Volker bug report was for this scenario.

The first (PR not operating, thus none of the minors/privates exchanged, 
but all 4 10% shares sold) is clearly ruled in the German second edition 
rules => PR cannot raise, as it is non-operating.

German second edition (2.6.3.4):
"... einer im Betrieb befindlichen... "

Unfortunately there is no equivalent in the English second edition of 
the rules. One has to keep in mind, that the English second rules 
edition is still based on the German first edition.

Stefan

1835 is the equivalent to "Doppelkopf" of 18xx. ;-)


On 08/17/2015 06:27 PM, Dr. Martin Brumm wrote:
> Hi,
>
> let me step in there again.
>
> We do have to make a difference in time/game phase.
>
> Previously the game didnt raise the prie of the prussian if the new
> shares had been sold out because there were still the reserved ones that
> couldnt be exchanged at that time.
>
> I do agree that once the prussian gets active and the minors may be
> exchanged that this is an entire different scenario, which i dont really
> want to judge. I think that the share price should rise cause
> technically all shares are in play (even some as minors or privates) but
> i can see the merit in the statement below.
> My intention with the option was to fix the first (flawed in my opinion)
> behaviour though.
>
> Regards,
> Martin
> Am 17.08.15 um 16:44 schrieb com...@ip...:
>> I've posed the question to a friend who has a copy of the game. My memory
>> is that the rules aren't clear on the subject, but that our interpretation
>> has always been that since the owners of the private companies that have
>> not merged with the Prussian have had the chance to do so and not exercised
>> that option, it is not considered to be fully subscribed. I will post his
>> reply when I receive it.
>>
>> Mike
>>
>>> -- Original Message --
>>> To: "Development list for Rails: an 18xx game"
>>> 	<rai...@li...>
>>> From: Stefan Frey <ste...@we...>
>>> Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2015 15:57:43 +0200
>>> Subject: Re: [Rails-devel] 1835 Shareprice of Pru at the End of an SR
>>> Reply-To: "Development list for Rails: an 18xx game"
>>> 	<rai...@li...>
>>>
>>>
>>> Still open issue:
>>>
>>> What is the default setting for this game option?
>>>
>>> My current understanding from the rules set (2nd version DE and EN)
>>> available to me is that the default is that Prussian stock price raises
>>> even if there are un-exchanged (reserved) shares in the bank.
>>>
>>> However both (experienced) players John and Volker prefer the reverse as
>>>
>>> default. It could be that the 1st version of the rules were different?
>>> However I cannot find those online. Maybe anyone of you can check those?
>>>
>>> Most likely I will forward the question to 18xx yahoo, if we cannot find
>>>
>>> a clear answer.
>>>
>>> Stefan
>>>
>>>
>>> On 07/31/2015 11:57 PM, John David Galt wrote:
>>>> On 2015-07-30 10:30, Stefan Frey wrote:
>>>>> Hi Volker,
>>>>> thanks for your reply: Yes Rails previously did not increase the
>>>>> Prussian share price, however in my view this is not the "standard",
>> but
>>>>> simply a bug. However I am interested to know, if you (or anyone else)
>>>>> has a different opinion on that matter?
>>>>>
>>>>> At least for the two rules set I consulted.
>>>>>
>>>>> English (2nd):
>>>>> "If at the end of a share dealing round, all purchasable shares in a
>>>>> company are owned by players, i.e. all sold and none in the Bank Pool,
>>>>> then the share price...".
>>>>>
>>>>> German (2nd):
>>>>> "Befinden sich am Ende einer Aktienrunde keine Aktien einer in Betrieb
>>>>> befindlichen AG im Bankpool bzw. auf einem der Stapel 'Nichtverkaufte
>>>>> Aktien', so wird der Kursmarker ..."
>>>>>
>>>>> The main difference is merely that the German highlights that the
>>>>> company has to be operating, thus Prussian requires an exchanged M2.
>>>>>
>>>>> I am a little reluctant to support too many (minor) Game Options for
>> a
>>>>> game with enough variants and ambiguous rules, but if there is good
>>>>> support to convince me then I will be happy to add the option again.
>>>>>
>>>>> Stefan
>>>> I guess I have the first edition, but I am used to the price NOT going
>>>> up and prefer it that way.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Rails-devel mailing list
>>>> Rai...@li...
>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
>>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Rails-devel mailing list
>>> Rai...@li...
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> _______________________________________________
>> Rails-devel mailing list
>> Rai...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Rails-devel mailing list
> Rai...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
>

Re: [Rails-devel] 1835 Shareprice of Pru at the End of an SR

[Dr. M. B. <dr....@t-...>]

Hi,

let me step in there again.

We do have to make a difference in time/game phase.

Previously the game didnt raise the prie of the prussian if the new 
shares had been sold out because there were still the reserved ones that 
couldnt be exchanged at that time.

I do agree that once the prussian gets active and the minors may be 
exchanged that this is an entire different scenario, which i dont really 
want to judge. I think that the share price should rise cause 
technically all shares are in play (even some as minors or privates) but 
i can see the merit in the statement below.
My intention with the option was to fix the first (flawed in my opinion) 
behaviour though.

Regards,
Martin
Am 17.08.15 um 16:44 schrieb com...@ip...:
> I've posed the question to a friend who has a copy of the game. My memory
> is that the rules aren't clear on the subject, but that our interpretation
> has always been that since the owners of the private companies that have
> not merged with the Prussian have had the chance to do so and not exercised
> that option, it is not considered to be fully subscribed. I will post his
> reply when I receive it.
>
> Mike
>
>> -- Original Message --
>> To: "Development list for Rails: an 18xx game"
>> 	<rai...@li...>
>> From: Stefan Frey <ste...@we...>
>> Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2015 15:57:43 +0200
>> Subject: Re: [Rails-devel] 1835 Shareprice of Pru at the End of an SR
>> Reply-To: "Development list for Rails: an 18xx game"
>> 	<rai...@li...>
>>
>>
>> Still open issue:
>>
>> What is the default setting for this game option?
>>
>> My current understanding from the rules set (2nd version DE and EN)
>> available to me is that the default is that Prussian stock price raises
>> even if there are un-exchanged (reserved) shares in the bank.
>>
>> However both (experienced) players John and Volker prefer the reverse as
>>
>> default. It could be that the 1st version of the rules were different?
>> However I cannot find those online. Maybe anyone of you can check those?
>>
>> Most likely I will forward the question to 18xx yahoo, if we cannot find
>>
>> a clear answer.
>>
>> Stefan
>>
>>
>> On 07/31/2015 11:57 PM, John David Galt wrote:
>>> On 2015-07-30 10:30, Stefan Frey wrote:
>>>> Hi Volker,
>>>> thanks for your reply: Yes Rails previously did not increase the
>>>> Prussian share price, however in my view this is not the "standard",
> but
>>>> simply a bug. However I am interested to know, if you (or anyone else)
>>>> has a different opinion on that matter?
>>>>
>>>> At least for the two rules set I consulted.
>>>>
>>>> English (2nd):
>>>> "If at the end of a share dealing round, all purchasable shares in a
>>>> company are owned by players, i.e. all sold and none in the Bank Pool,
>>>> then the share price...".
>>>>
>>>> German (2nd):
>>>> "Befinden sich am Ende einer Aktienrunde keine Aktien einer in Betrieb
>>>> befindlichen AG im Bankpool bzw. auf einem der Stapel 'Nichtverkaufte
>>>> Aktien', so wird der Kursmarker ..."
>>>>
>>>> The main difference is merely that the German highlights that the
>>>> company has to be operating, thus Prussian requires an exchanged M2.
>>>>
>>>> I am a little reluctant to support too many (minor) Game Options for
> a
>>>> game with enough variants and ambiguous rules, but if there is good
>>>> support to convince me then I will be happy to add the option again.
>>>>
>>>> Stefan
>>> I guess I have the first edition, but I am used to the price NOT going
>>> up and prefer it that way.
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Rails-devel mailing list
>>> Rai...@li...
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
>>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> _______________________________________________
>> Rails-devel mailing list
>> Rai...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Rails-devel mailing list
> Rai...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel

Re: [Rails-devel] 1835 Shareprice of Pru at the End of an SR

[<com...@ip...>]

I've posed the question to a friend who has a copy of the game. My memory
is that the rules aren't clear on the subject, but that our interpretation
has always been that since the owners of the private companies that have
not merged with the Prussian have had the chance to do so and not exercised
that option, it is not considered to be fully subscribed. I will post his
reply when I receive it.

Mike

>-- Original Message --
>To: "Development list for Rails: an 18xx game"
>	<rai...@li...>
>From: Stefan Frey <ste...@we...>
>Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2015 15:57:43 +0200
>Subject: Re: [Rails-devel] 1835 Shareprice of Pru at the End of an SR
>Reply-To: "Development list for Rails: an 18xx game"
>	<rai...@li...>
>
>
>Still open issue:
>
>What is the default setting for this game option?
>
>My current understanding from the rules set (2nd version DE and EN) 
>available to me is that the default is that Prussian stock price raises

>even if there are un-exchanged (reserved) shares in the bank.
>
>However both (experienced) players John and Volker prefer the reverse as
>
>default. It could be that the 1st version of the rules were different? 
>However I cannot find those online. Maybe anyone of you can check those?
>
>Most likely I will forward the question to 18xx yahoo, if we cannot find
>
>a clear answer.
>
>Stefan
>
>
>On 07/31/2015 11:57 PM, John David Galt wrote:
>> On 2015-07-30 10:30, Stefan Frey wrote:
>>> Hi Volker,
>>> thanks for your reply: Yes Rails previously did not increase the
>>> Prussian share price, however in my view this is not the "standard",
but
>>> simply a bug. However I am interested to know, if you (or anyone else)
>>> has a different opinion on that matter?
>>>
>>> At least for the two rules set I consulted.
>>>
>>> English (2nd):
>>> "If at the end of a share dealing round, all purchasable shares in a
>>> company are owned by players, i.e. all sold and none in the Bank Pool,
>>> then the share price...".
>>>
>>> German (2nd):
>>> "Befinden sich am Ende einer Aktienrunde keine Aktien einer in Betrieb
>>> befindlichen AG im Bankpool bzw. auf einem der Stapel 'Nichtverkaufte
>>> Aktien', so wird der Kursmarker ..."
>>>
>>> The main difference is merely that the German highlights that the
>>> company has to be operating, thus Prussian requires an exchanged M2.
>>>
>>> I am a little reluctant to support too many (minor) Game Options for
a
>>> game with enough variants and ambiguous rules, but if there is good
>>> support to convince me then I will be happy to add the option again.
>>>
>>> Stefan
>>
>> I guess I have the first edition, but I am used to the price NOT going
>> up and prefer it that way.
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> _______________________________________________
>> Rails-devel mailing list
>> Rai...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
>>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>_______________________________________________
>Rails-devel mailing list
>Rai...@li...
>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel

Re: [Rails-devel] 1835 Shareprice of Pru at the End of an SR

[Dr. M. B. <dr....@t-...>]

Hi Stefan,
you misunderstood Volker there. He wanted the unexchanged shares to be 
ignored.

Regards,
Martin
Am 17.08.15 um 15:57 schrieb Stefan Frey:
> Still open issue:
>
> What is the default setting for this game option?
>
> My current understanding from the rules set (2nd version DE and EN)
> available to me is that the default is that Prussian stock price raises
> even if there are un-exchanged (reserved) shares in the bank.
>
> However both (experienced) players John and Volker prefer the reverse as
> default. It could be that the 1st version of the rules were different?
> However I cannot find those online. Maybe anyone of you can check those?
>
> Most likely I will forward the question to 18xx yahoo, if we cannot find
> a clear answer.
>
> Stefan
>
>
> On 07/31/2015 11:57 PM, John David Galt wrote:
>> On 2015-07-30 10:30, Stefan Frey wrote:
>>> Hi Volker,
>>> thanks for your reply: Yes Rails previously did not increase the
>>> Prussian share price, however in my view this is not the "standard", but
>>> simply a bug. However I am interested to know, if you (or anyone else)
>>> has a different opinion on that matter?
>>>
>>> At least for the two rules set I consulted.
>>>
>>> English (2nd):
>>> "If at the end of a share dealing round, all purchasable shares in a
>>> company are owned by players, i.e. all sold and none in the Bank Pool,
>>> then the share price...".
>>>
>>> German (2nd):
>>> "Befinden sich am Ende einer Aktienrunde keine Aktien einer in Betrieb
>>> befindlichen AG im Bankpool bzw. auf einem der Stapel 'Nichtverkaufte
>>> Aktien', so wird der Kursmarker ..."
>>>
>>> The main difference is merely that the German highlights that the
>>> company has to be operating, thus Prussian requires an exchanged M2.
>>>
>>> I am a little reluctant to support too many (minor) Game Options for a
>>> game with enough variants and ambiguous rules, but if there is good
>>> support to convince me then I will be happy to add the option again.
>>>
>>> Stefan
>> I guess I have the first edition, but I am used to the price NOT going
>> up and prefer it that way.
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> _______________________________________________
>> Rails-devel mailing list
>> Rai...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
>>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Rails-devel mailing list
> Rai...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel