[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Creating dead player after the game has started.

[Thomas Strub <ue80@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Oct 14, 2002 at 06:17:41AM -0700, Raimar Falke wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 13, 2002 at 06:01:58PM +0200, Reinier Post wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 12, 2002 at 05:40:22PM -0500, Mike Kaufman wrote:
> > > On Sat, Oct 12, 2002 at 11:36:43PM +0200, Thomas Strub wrote:
> > > 
> > > this is really a kludge.
> > 
> > I think it's an excellent kludge: small, clean, fully functional,
> > an improvement in every way.  Worth including.
> 
> But it still is a kludge. And while we may apply kludges before a
> release ;) normally we don't.

Think for me as player its enough that is included for metaserver. I
think that a fully featured, good solution is better. But i don't like
to wait to long. 
 
> > For reference, this patch is under PR#1767.
> > 
> > I still have to try it (sorry).  What I find really confusing is
> > the term "observer".  This can be used to mean two things:
> > 
> >   - a player observer: someone who can see a player does, but cannot
> >     do anything; this is what dwp's multiple connections allow
> >   - a game observer: someone who can see (most of) what happens in the
> >     game, but is not a player and cannot do anything; this has always been
> >     the position of a dead player in Freeciv
> 
> Traditionally "observer" means the first. But I agree that we also
> need the second. It would be some kind of root observer: can look into
> any city, report and so on for every player. A huge kind of
> information. To break this into smaller pieces we _may_ want to model
> this with a two dimensional matrix: first dimension are the players
> which I can observe, second is the kind of thing I can observe (map,
> cities, research, ...).

Think that should be done post-release. So why shouldn't we use the
kludge until the good solution is ready? (Ok there is no translation ...)

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Strub  ***  eMail ue80@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx