[Freeciv-Dev] Re: 3 patches for use on public gameservers

[Paul Zastoupil <paulz@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Aug 29, 2001 at 10:11:23PM -0400, Ross W. Wetmore wrote:
> At 12:59 PM 01/08/28 -0400, Jason Dorje Short wrote:
> >Reinier Post wrote:
> >
> >> And I'd hope to see more comments on the trivial patches of
> >> 
> >>   http://arch.freeciv.org/freeciv-dev-200108/msg00762.html
> >
> >Setting the minimum timeout to 40 is definitely good for public games. 
> >However, it will make debugging harder since it's convenient to set the
> >timeout to -1 or 1.  I was going to suggest that the 40 minimum be tied
> >to NDEBUG, but of course most public games are compiled with debugging
> >anyway.  In any case, this functionality is especially important because
> >I just went to a civserver.freeciv.org game and changed the timeout to
> >-1 ... this simply can't be allowed.
> >
> >jason
> 
> Release versions should always be compiled with NDEBUG. Don't even consider
> doing it otherwise. That is what the flag is for, and having to invent 
> another one that is REALLY_REALLY_REALLY_DEBUG is a tad foolish.

I agree.

> It is sufficient to do the trivial thing and have the patch update just one 
> of the two values in current CVS, i.e. the one that isn't set to -1. One
> shouldn't need to have to comment on this.
> 
> And maintainers should be capable of merging such diffs into CVS, even if
> they have been allowed to bit-rot for a few weeks :-).

The "maintainers" are certainly capable.  But everytime the patch has
to be changed, things will break until its done.  I find that I have
less and less time to do the things that I would wish for Freeciv, and
I know Reinier is feeling the same way.  Civserver.freeciv.org doesn't
have to be the only public server in the world either.  I think tying
certain things into the code to support public servers is a good idea.

This particular case of timeout, we could add a min timeout variable that
is cmd level hack to take care of it, then it could be set in the rc file.

-- 
Paul Zastoupil