Page 2 of 2

Posted: Thu Apr 08, 2010 2:50 am
by Weyrman
This is our idea, not Diedel's and I think we have to wait and see which model he is happy to implement.

He will be the one posting the releases and we have no right to try and dictate how he does that.

The two approaches have been laid out and we now have to wait for a reply.

Posted: Thu Apr 08, 2010 3:39 am
by pokeman7452
In reply to Sirius: My objective with all this is threefold:
1) Minimize testing done by Diedel
This will make him only have to test what he has just done, and leave making sure he didn't just ruin everything to us.

2) Make D2X-XL less buggy to the general public.
It seems a major problem rebirth users have (although it has much improved since 1.14) is general stability. So often I have hopped on to play with my brother or a friend only to encounter some bugs that disrupt the basic gameplay. I have never beaten the D1 or D2 campaign. Every time I try, I encounter some serious bug or crash and have to lose my save with the fix. With this, they can download in confidence knowing that if it is on, it's stable enough to play. We catch the big bugs so they don't have to see them. If we are testing versions after they are released, it will undermine this whole idea. Worst case scenario. I understand that's old, but can you imagine the poor soul who happened to fumble onto that release the first time he tried to play D2X-XL? That's one less user and potential donator.

3) Increase significance of versions.
I have noticed a trend on the version history: many times when he fixes a bug in a certain feature (e.g. lightning), he ends up breaking that feature in some other way. I don't blame him, I know the code is finicky. I want to avoid new versions just to fix those bugs. This will make new versions appear less often and be more significant.

So it seems Diedel will have to provide the debug builds when he posts the new threads. That works I suppose, that also solves the hosting issue. It's just more work for him, which I was trying to avoid.

I tried to keep this post respectful, please inform me if I failed.

Posted: Thu Apr 08, 2010 5:24 am
by Sirius
Looks fine...

Posted: Thu Apr 08, 2010 8:35 am
by karx11erx
There have been references to how I did the v14 beta phase. The big difference between v14 and all the small bug fix releases I am usually doing is that v14 had the most massive change to the code base ever done, so a beta test was direly needed.

For changes like adding anaglyph 3D or speed increases, such a massive and long beta phase isn't needed. It is however certainly helpful if a few people can use such a new version on a variety on hardware and settings and report any problems ahead of releasing it, giving me the chance to fix things that escaped my attention or need a special setup to be exposed.

Having me use a semaphore of the kind "RC #### is ready for testing" is a good idea.

Posted: Thu Apr 08, 2010 4:04 pm
by pokeman7452
So, what is your plan? Wait for us to test the versions before release? Or do we test after release?

Posted: Thu Apr 08, 2010 4:07 pm
by karx11erx
karx11erx wrote:Having me use a semaphore of the kind "RC #### is ready for testing" is a good idea.

Posted: Thu Apr 08, 2010 4:19 pm
by pokeman7452
Oh, I see now. We still need to establish a checklist before we can start.

Posted: Fri Apr 09, 2010 11:54 pm
by Mahona
by the way poke....I would love to help too....I can do everything on the checklist however the only thing I'm wondering about is that I'm fairly certain I will not be able to make it EVERY time a testing session is happening: Will this be ok?

Posted: Sat Apr 10, 2010 12:26 am
by karx11erx
That will be ok.

Posted: Sat Apr 10, 2010 7:05 pm
by Mahona
ok cool :D
this makes me happy! :P

P.S. at some point however I need to talk to you personally about why my compiler will compile.....yet it refuses to run the JUST compiled program (even with a clean setup)

its something about a "side-by-side" error.
Much appreciated,


Posted: Wed May 05, 2010 9:45 pm
by Sykes
Looks like some progress was made. Quite a bit actually. I'm glad the gears are finally turning.

Posted: Wed May 05, 2010 10:07 pm
by karx11erx
If you are building a release exe, you need to explicity prohibit linkage of msvcrtd.lib.