[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Deferred patches

["Per I. Mathisen" <per@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 15 Jul 2002, Davide Pagnin wrote:
> I was waiting for this moment since the feature freeze time! :-)

Haven't we all :)

> Here there is the list of mine patches, waiting for inclusion, with a
> brief description:

Seems like all of these are my responsibility.

> 1. luxury-cap. (Civ II compliance)
> http://arch.freeciv.org/freeciv-dev-200205/msg00201.html
> Introduction of a capping to the luxury that can be useful in a city,
> (at the moment, 2 x city size).
> NOTE 1: Deferred because marked as 'new feature'
> NOTE 2: Per said that has to be converted to be 'optional', so that it
> can be left out of the default ruleset
>
> In this case, I ask for a final word, I don't want to pollute the ML and
> the configuration files or the server options with civ II compliance
> options, and so a word before starting to code this as an option, about
> where to put this rule and how, would be greatly appreciated.

Put it in game.ruleset, IMHO. While you're making it an option, you can
make the multiplication factor configurable too. Unlimited can be eg a
"limit" of 999 times city size.

> 2. Specialists (Civ II compliance)
> http://arch.freeciv.org/freeciv-dev-200205/msg00233.html
> Starting to take Specialists from the content citizen instead of the
> unhappy one, thus giving a penalization togovernment like republic or
> democracy.
> NOTE 1: Deferred because marked as 'new feature'
> NOTE 2: Ross stated that the AI could not handle this new behavior
> properly
>
> Ross: What has to be done to ensure that everything works?
> Per: Ross objection wasa showstopper for the stable branch, but it also
> for the development branch?

Raahul said he would look into this. I await his answer.

> 3. Corruption-handling (Civ II compliance - and more)
> http://arch.freeciv.org/freeciv-dev-200206/msg00191.html
> In a city with a courthouse, it is possible to have more than 50% of
> corruption, unlike civ II, the patch corrects this behavior, and changes
> also how other modifier to corruption are handled so that it is easier
> to understand how they work.
>
> NOTE 1: Deferred for unknown reason
> NOTE 2: Tony said it is worthwhile considering it a bugfix and also the
> new handling of the corruption modifiers has some sense.
> NOTE 3: Per stated that the he want to maintain the 'more than 50%
> corruption behavior'
>
> Per: Is an option feasible in this case? It is the case to reconsider
> this matter?

Gen. impr. should be extended to implement both cases. That way neither
aproach will be hardcoded and civ2 can have it its way in the civ2
ruleset. And we can fight about what should be the default afterwards ;)

> 4. empire-size (Civ II Compliance)
> http://arch.freeciv.org/freeciv-dev-200206/msg00360.html
> In the civ II rules, increasing the number of cities, make the citizen
> more unhappy. This can be done also with freeciv ruleset by changing the
> empire_size_modifier and the empire_size_inc variables.
> I ask to modify them in the civ II ruleset so that freeciv will be more
> adherent (but sadly not equal, for which we need a change in the
> mechanic of happiness handling) to civ II behavior.
>
> NOTE 1: Deferred because no one has made comment on this
>
> Per: The submitted patch put the limit so that they are similar to the
> deity level limits of civ II, if civ II ruleset try to mimic another
> level of civ II, say prince level, I can rework them, but I hope to hear
> some feedback before trying to find out.

Sounds ok to me.

> 5. corruption-param (Civ II Compliance)
> http://arch.freeciv.org/freeciv-dev-200206/msg00360.html
> In the civ II rules, republic has less corruption than monarchy, so a
> modification of the civ II ruleset of freeciv is needed, also other
> government like communism and fundamentalism need a correction.
>
> NOTE 1: Deferred because no one has mad comment on this.
> NOTE 2: Because of the true isometric map of civ II it difficult to set
> the levels to match exactly.

The patch is ok. The issue you raise of unbribable vs no corruption should
be fixed, but please look into Ben's efforts to generalise governments
first.

> 6. audio:
> http://arch.freeciv.org/freeciv-dev-200206/msg00357.html
> During the process of stabilitazion, a sound.m4 macro has been created,
> I've asked to change some of the behavior of the sound interface.
> i.e: the level of the log messages
>
> NOTE : Per left to me the proposal of this patch, but it has not been
> applied nor any comment to say why has been posted.

I will apply this soon.

Yours
Per