Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: October 2004:
[Freeciv-Dev] (PR#10659)
Home

[Freeciv-Dev] (PR#10659)

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: rp@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] (PR#10659)
From: "Jason Short" <jdorje@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 08:50:08 -0700
Reply-to: rt@xxxxxxxxxxx

<URL: http://rt.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=10659 >

> [rp - Thu Oct 21 07:59:51 2004]:
> 
> Now that PR#10578 (add the isophex tileset) has been resolved,
> let me say that in the last two years I have only played with
> extra small tilesets, usually tinydent.
> 
> Can tinydent be added to the distribution as well?
> The main point of this is to see that it remains up to date
> so my client doesn't crash on /start.  Standard maintenance would
> just make sure that it doesn't crash - using fallbacks I suppose -
> while designing extra tiles would be the work of volunteers.

If we do that, then why not add back engels as well?  Why not have all
tilesets in CVS?

I *do* think all tilesets should be stored in CVS, in one form or
another.  I'm not sure which should be distributed though.  The only
drawback of adding more tilesets to the distribution is it increases the
size of the tarball.

jason



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