Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-data: April 2003:
[freeciv-data] Re: [Freeciv-Dev] (PR#3597) german ruleset new version

[freeciv-data] Re: [Freeciv-Dev] (PR#3597) german ruleset new version

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: freeciv-data@xxxxxxxxxxx, rt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [freeciv-data] Re: [Freeciv-Dev] (PR#3597) german ruleset new version
From: Thomas Strub <ue80@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2003 21:00:05 +0200
Reply-to: freeciv-data@xxxxxxxxxxx

On Fri, Apr 04, 2003 at 08:23:51PM +0200, Christian Knoke wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 04, 2003 at 04:25:22PM +0100, Daniel Herding wrote:
> > Hello,
> > 
> > This ruleset includes Wuppertal, Barmen and Elberfeld.
> > 
> > But in fact, in 1929 Barmen and Elberfeld were united, creating
> > Wuppertal. Today, they're city quarters of Wuppertal. That's why
> > I think Barmen and Elberfeld shouldn't be included in german.ruleset.
> > 
> >
> > For the people who can read German.
> Yes, I know this. But at some time long ago when I wanted to change it
> people complained for reasons I do not remember.
> There is also a problem with Klostergrab, which AFAICS refers to a city
> which is *not* on the territory of today's germany, even when there is
> a(nother) city by that name near Dresden; the latter one too small and
> unimportant to be included in Freeciv.

Why don't we split up the german nation in different germanies?
1. Reich (Karl der Grosse 800 - 17xx)
Preussen, Bayern, Schwaben ... (-1871)
Deutsches Reich (-1945)
Bundesrepublik Deutschland

All could have different flags so i don't see small problems. Only the
big one that someone has to do it *g*


[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]