Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: August 2001:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: [Patch] Watchtower v3

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: [Patch] Watchtower v3

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: Jules Bean <jules@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Sebastian Bauer <sebauer@xxxxxxxxxxx>, <freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: [Patch] Watchtower v3
From: Karl-Ingo Friese <kif@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 15:52:03 +0200 (CEST)

On Thu, 30 Aug 2001, Jules Bean wrote:

> Why?  Because it's exactly the sort of thing you'd want to change in
> custom rulesets.
> On the subject: the dichotomoy between ruleset parameters and server
> variables is becoming harder and harder to understand. A radical
> solution: make them *all* ruleset variables, and permit ruleset
> variables to be altered from the server commandline. (These
> alterations wouldn't be written out to the ruleset files, it would
> just be a way of having custom games).

I totaly disagree here. The opposite would be useful: make all
rulesets server variables. Especialy on meta server games it is
a pain that you still can not change citymindist at runtime.

IMHO a ruleset should be nothing but a set of server variables.
This would enhance transperancy and be much more userfriendly
then the current situation. Just join a few games and you know
what I mean.

A gamers point of view,

> Jules
> PS: Sebastian, your version of mutt is generating a broken
> Mail-Followup-To: header with the bare address 'swk', which some MTA
> somewhere is (brokenly, I guess) completing to swk@xxxxxxxxxxxx.


Karl-Ingo Friese

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