Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: January 2004:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#6970) Wishlist: tririemes lost near arctic
Home

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#6970) Wishlist: tririemes lost near arctic

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: mburda@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#6970) Wishlist: tririemes lost near arctic
From: "Jason Short" <jshort@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 14:57:36 -0800
Reply-to: rt@xxxxxxxxxxx

<URL: http://rt.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=6970 >

Marcelo Burda wrote:
> <URL: http://rt.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=6970 >
> 
> I understand your “proposal” but why you not make a more useful comment?
> 
> My patch is a little useful patch. This no break really compatibility 
> with civilizations (c) because poles are “ out of game zones” ( no body 
> play there ) in classical topology. And very nice for more sphere likes 
> ones were the poles are more centrals.  
> 
>  If i begin implementing a TER_UNSAFE this is more work and we need 
> touch the generators too! More comment about your idea instead get a 
> blocked status make me more happy.

It is more work, but you don't need to worry about the generators. 
They'll need a full overhaul to work with gen-terrain.  However, I don't 
want to introduce more terrain-specific properties that aren't 
controlled by the ruleset, when we can easily put them into the ruleset 
at the same time.

It may not be necessary to have a TER_UNSAFE option.  Maybe you can just 
check TER_POLAR - this would make more sense in conjunction with a 
server option.  Of course there is no TER_POLAR.

It shouldn't take much work to make such a patch.  Just a few more lines 
of code.

jason





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