[Freeciv-Dev] Re: freeciv 1.12.1 spec?

[Mike Kaufman <mkaufman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 10:08:32PM -0500, Ross W. Wetmore wrote:
> At 07:36 AM 01/12/05 -0600, Mike Kaufman wrote:
> >On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 05:02:24AM -0800, Raahul Kumar wrote:
> >> 
> >> --- Raimar Falke <hawk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> > On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 02:46:15PM -0600, Mike Kaufman wrote:
> >> One nice feature I would like to see in the code is AI cleanups. 
> >
> >I thought about this one before I wrote my list. I agree that we need
> >the cleanups. I just think that the goal to "cleanup the AI" is
> >nebulous. When do you say that [not] enough cleanup has been done to release?
> >
> >As I said, I don't think all development on "side" projects should stop
> >to focus on such a 1.12.1 goal list (that would be pretty silly). I
> >assume that the goal of the AI cleanups is _not_ to change AI behavior
> >yet --- just cleanup the code? If 1.12.1 comes out with crystal AI code,
> >then more power to us, but if the cleanups are only "half-done", I don't
> >think it should stop us from releasing...
> 
> It is not unreasonable for anyone with a specific AI update aka bugfix
> to have it added to a list of candidates. 
> 
> The list can be prioritized and a cutoff selected. The categories for
> deciding the prioritization might prove an interesting discussion, but
> it wouldn't be a bad idea to set an initial expectation of what is and
> isn't useful, or what areas are considered most deficient.
> 

sounds fine to me. perhaps the people working on the AI right now could
set themselves a couple of 1.12.1 goals and present them to the list? 

> This can be a general rule for anything not selected as a PRIME FEATURE.
> 
> BTW: only things that currently exist or are extensions of things that
>      are in the works should really be considered without some exceptional
>      reason.

yes.

> 
> >-mike
> 
> Cheers,
> RossW
> =====