Thread: [TuxKart-devel] Answering to steve barker and about the tuxkart and supertuxkart merge..
Status: Alpha
Brought to you by:
sjbaker
Menu
▾
▴
tuxkart-devel
|
From: Coz - <cos...@ho...> - 2005-04-12 04:38:25
|
>Message: 1 >Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 07:17:45 -0700 >From: Steve Baker <sjb...@ai...> >To: tux...@li... >Subject: Re: [TuxKart-devel] A small tought about diferences in tuxkart and > supertuxkart design.. >Reply-To: tux...@li... > >Caleb Sawtell wrote: > > >>I remember once that steve barker sayd that in tuxkart people should >spend > >>almost all the time driving. > >Do you mean me? Steve Baker? > >If so, I don't recall ever saying that. Maybe I misread, maybe you did and forgot, maybe someone else sayd so and I tought it was you XD It was just that I tought it would be a nice way of separating, one who has more driving related features(for example different ways of taking a curve or small speed boosts while being behind a driver, something that would not be wise in a kart game where the other karts probably have rear weapons coz it makes you an easier target, I don't mean to make any of the games being better than the other in the end). > >>If anybody is listening, specially steve barker since tuxkart is his > >>project, I pretty much would just want to know that if someone works in > >>tuxkart and someone else works in supertuxkart in the end they will be > >>pretty much be the same thing just with minimal differences that nobody > >>cares and when someone asks which one is better instead of saying "if >you > >>like <insert type of game> more you should choose tuxkart but if you >like > >><insert type of game here> more you should choose supertuxkart", they >say > >>"well.. emm.. I dunno they are almost the same it's just matter of > >>preference...". > >I didn't choose to make the supertuxkart/tuxkart split. I know XD that is why I don't say supertuxkart is your project :p >All I wanted was for the public distribution of TuxKart to actually *WORK* >and be portable and easy to maintain. > >I demanded of the team that tore Tuxkart apart that they finish making it >work before I'd sanction another public release. When they stopped working >on it (there had been no check-ins for months) and the project wouldn't >even >compile (at least not on my computer), I didn't have time to start fixing >up all of the chaos that was left behind. > >Left with a situation where the current CVS wouldn't compile on most Linux >distro's and when it did, it was full of bugs - and I had pressures at work >and commitments to other project - so I had no time to get in and fix stuff >myself, I had no choice but to say that there could be no further public >releases unless I backed out most (or perhaps all) of the changes they'd >made. I'm not saying that it's your fault or anything, I just wanted to atract your attention coz like I sayd, tuxkart is your project. >This provoked the project fork - I have not been following events since >then. > >Project forks are generally evil - but I can understand why they did that >and have not created a fuss over it. > >If you wish to pick up supertuxkart and make it different/better/whatever, >that's a good thing and I wish you luck with it. I just picked supertuxkart coz I tought that you might work on tuxkart, not that I wouldn't be interested in tuxkart but prolly supertuxkart would collect more dust, and I don't want to see the GOTM effort, even if it wasn't something very productive, go to waste. >Message: 2 >To: tux...@li... >Subject: Re: [TuxKart-devel] A small tought about diferences in tuxkart and > supertuxkart design.. >From: Ingo Ruhnke <gr...@gm...> >Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 14:52:14 +0200 >Reply-To: tux...@li... > >"Coz -" <cos...@ho...> writes: > > > I was just thinking that tuxkart and supertuxkart, since they are > > different proyects now should have slightly different aims. Besides > > all the supertuxkart is more desorganized than tuxkart but > > supertuxkart has more features thingie, I mean like, design aims. > >SuperTuxKart is really nothing more than a 'parking lot' for the work >done in the TuxKart GoTM. Steve didn't like some changes we did, a >bunch of developers lost interest and left and in the end Steve wanted >to roll back the CVS to a working state before the GoTM, so we simple >create SuperTuxKart project to 'park' all the stuff we had done in the >GoTM for possible later reuse. So the whole reason for the fork is not >because we had so many ideas and workpower that they didn't fit all >into one project, but because we hadn't have enough manpower to get >even a single project into a working state. > >Neither SuperTuxKart nor TuxKart project have at the moment anybody >activly working on them and there is really no good reason why they >shouldn't join back into one sooner or later. Oh. And a big Oh this one is XD I like the 'there is really no good reason why they shouldn't join back into one sooner or later' part. Now I wonder what I should really do to get the project back at how it was supposed to be in the first place.. either try to implement the things of supertuxkart in tuxkart, or to fix the bugs in supertuxkart? O.o Suggestions? _________________________________________________________________ Charla con tus amigos en línea mediante MSN Messenger: http://messenger.latam.msn.com/ |
|
From: Ryan F. <rf...@gm...> - 2005-04-12 04:47:49
|
> Oh. And a big Oh this one is XD > I like the 'there is really no good reason why they shouldn't join back into > one sooner or later' part. > > Now I wonder what I should really do to get the project back at how it was > supposed to be in the first place.. either try to implement the things of > supertuxkart in tuxkart, or to fix the bugs in supertuxkart? O.o > Suggestions? Well, I think there are a few reasons that Steve doesn't want supertuxkart (as it is now) to be the current TuxKart. I would recommend working on supertuxkart to implement the missing features (whatever they may be) and fixing up bugs. -- Ryan |
|
From: Ricardo C. <ri...@ae...> - 2005-04-12 09:28:05
|
I'd say port SuperTuxKart completely to Plib. I'm sure you will catch most= of=20 the bugs on the process. Cheers, Ricardo Em Ter=E7a, 12 de Abril de 2005 05:38, o Coz - escreveu: > >SuperTuxKart is really nothing more than a 'parking lot' for the work > >done in the TuxKart GoTM. Steve didn't like some changes we did, a > >bunch of developers lost interest and left and in the end Steve wanted > >to roll back the CVS to a working state before the GoTM, so we simple > >create SuperTuxKart project to 'park' all the stuff we had done in the > >GoTM for possible later reuse. So the whole reason for the fork is not > >because we had so many ideas and workpower that they didn't fit all > >into one project, but because we hadn't have enough manpower to get > >even a single project into a working state. > > > >Neither SuperTuxKart nor TuxKart project have at the moment anybody > >activly working on them and there is really no good reason why they > >shouldn't join back into one sooner or later. > > Oh. And a big Oh this one is XD > I like the 'there is really no good reason why they shouldn't join back > into one sooner or later' part. > > Now I wonder what I should really do to get the project back at how it was > supposed to be in the first place.. either try to implement the things of > supertuxkart in tuxkart, or to fix the bugs in supertuxkart? O.o > Suggestions? > =2D-=20 In the eyes of my dog, I'm a man. -- Martin Mull |
|
From: Charles G. <ch...@ve...> - 2005-04-12 11:53:24
|
On Tue, 2005-04-12 at 10:32 +0100, Ricardo Cruz wrote: > I'd say port SuperTuxKart completely to Plib. I'm sure you will catch most of > the bugs on the process. I'd say that making it work well would be ahead of porting to Plib. If it worked well, then I'm sure Steve wouldn't mind using that even if he wanted to move it to pure Plib himself. Making the game run well is not a giant task (probably more tedious than difficult). Porting to Plib at the same time as fixing the bugs and the missing features would be a fairly intimidating task. - C |
|
From: Ingo R. <gr...@gm...> - 2005-04-12 12:11:07
|
Ricardo Cruz <ri...@ae...> writes: > I'd say port SuperTuxKart completely to Plib. I'm sure you will > catch most of the bugs on the process. No, the non-plib code is just window initialisation and such, while all the relevant bugs are gameplay related. So switching stuff back to plib will do nothing more then remove features from the game (fullscreen mode, etc.) while fixing none of the gameplay related issues. -- WWW: http://pingus.seul.org/~grumbel/ JabberID: gr...@ja... ICQ: 59461927 |
|
From: Steve B. <sjb...@ai...> - 2005-04-12 14:26:27
|
Coz - wrote: > Maybe I misread, maybe you did and forgot, maybe someone else sayd so > and I tought it was you XD It was just that I tought it would be a nice > way of separating, one who has more driving related features(for example > different ways of taking a curve or small speed boosts while being > behind a driver, something that would not be wise in a kart game where > the other karts probably have rear weapons coz it makes you an easier > target, I don't mean to make any of the games being better than the > other in the end). The original Tuxkart has both weapons and speedup/slowdown collectables. It doesn't really seem likely that I'd be talking about taking things out of the original game does it? > I just picked supertuxkart coz I tought that you might work on tuxkart, > not that I wouldn't be interested in tuxkart but prolly supertuxkart > would collect more dust, and I don't want to see the GOTM effort, even > if it wasn't something very productive, go to waste. The original Tuxkart is only about 7,000 lines of code - I wrote it over about one or two weekends and built additional tracks as I felt like it. If I had an urge to do something major with it at this stage, I'd probably just start over - so it's unlikely that I'll do much more than fix bugs and maintain portability and such. It's possible (since I'm now leading the Nintendo DS Linux porting effort) that TuxKart will make an appearance on the DS. >> Neither SuperTuxKart nor TuxKart project have at the moment anybody >> activly working on them and there is really no good reason why they >> shouldn't join back into one sooner or later. > > Oh. And a big Oh this one is XD > I like the 'there is really no good reason why they shouldn't join back > into one sooner or later' part. No reason if someone is prepared to do a lot of work to make that happen. > Now I wonder what I should really do to get the project back at how it > was supposed to be in the first place.. either try to implement the > things of supertuxkart in tuxkart, or to fix the bugs in supertuxkart? > O.o Suggestions? Well, the major problem I have with the mods that were done to TuxKart was that it made the thing really hard for me to maintain. (And notice that whilst I don't plan major improvements to TuxKart - I *do* actively maintain it). The original TuxKart relied only on the PLIB library. That made maintenance very easy. If PLIB changes then *maybe* I have to upgrade TuxKart (but since PLIB is one of my other projects - that's an easy thing). You don't write a moderately successful game and say "Well, that's done" - you have to deal with between several - and dozens of emails per week from people who have some stupid problem or other with it. That support can easily eat 100% of your spare time - so programming 'defensively' to make installation as simple as it can possibly be is a driving force behind game design that you won't appreciate until you've been slashdotted! The new version depends on at least one or two other libraries too. It doesn't *need* to - people just gave up on using the PLIB facilities largely because they didn't understand them...but also because PLIB doesn't implement full-screen rendering under all OS's (although that could have been fixed). That drastically increases the difficulty of maintaining TuxKart and would also cause a large spike in the number of people emailing me to complain that it doesn't compile on their machines (typically because one or more libraries either isn't installed, isn't installed in the right place, or with the right header files, or is of some horribly outdated version). Helping those people can become a phenomenal burden and limiting the number of packages my games depend on is something I'm quite fanatical about. That's why I wrote and maintain PLIB - it's "one stop shopping". Some of the new track designs are OK - others are either too many polygons or are ill-structured - I'm not sure which and I don't have the time to track down and/or fix the problems. The new kart designs are OK - although they aren't what I would have chosen to do. All of the new GUI stuff is way more complex than it needs to be - I'd be strongly inclined to simply delete all of it - it adds nothing. The one single thing that TuxKart *REALLY* needed, it didn't get - and that was better AI and Kart-handling physics. ---------------------------- Steve Baker ------------------------- HomeEmail: <sjb...@ai...> WorkEmail: <sj...@li...> HomePage : http://www.sjbaker.org Projects : http://plib.sf.net http://tuxaqfh.sf.net http://tuxkart.sf.net http://prettypoly.sf.net -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- GCS d-- s:+ a+ C++++$ UL+++$ P--- L++++$ E--- W+++ N o+ K? w--- !O M- V-- PS++ PE- Y-- PGP-- t+ 5 X R+++ tv b++ DI++ D G+ e++ h--(-) r+++ y++++ -----END GEEK CODE BLOCK----- |
×
Want the latest updates on software, tech news, and AI?
Get latest updates about software, tech news, and AI from SourceForge directly in your inbox once a month.
Thanks for helping keep SourceForge clean.
X