2.3 projectile test builds [Vote for best build!]

The projects speaking tube.
Add your two cents if you want to.

Which of the three builds behaves best?

2.3-proj1
7
58%
2.3-proj2
1
8%
2.3-proj3
4
33%
 
Total votes: 12

cybersphinx
Inactive
Inactive
Posts: 1689
Joined: 01 Sep 2006, 19:17

Re: 2.3 projectile test builds [Vote for best build!]

Post by cybersphinx » 06 Sep 2011, 19:16

Iluvalar wrote:why did you took an old 3.0 betas as a test instead of synching master right away ? Are you sure developpers that will change master will care to synch 2.3 ?
Because the patch still applied without me having to change anything, and as far as I remember, nothing relevant changed in master later. And it's not that hard to backport changes even if you didn't write them yourself, at least in the areas where master and 2.3 don't differ much yet. If the branches differ, nothing from master will apply to 2.3 - and the other way around, so fixes to your code benefit only 2.3, while fixes to the 3.0 code will also benefit master.
We want information... information... information.

User avatar
Iluvalar
Regular
Regular
Posts: 1782
Joined: 02 Oct 2010, 18:44

Re: 2.3 projectile test builds [Vote for best build!]

Post by Iluvalar » 09 Sep 2011, 05:21

Understandably. However as i reuse the visibility line function, It would be dubious something will really need a serious fix without affecting that function the same way in master...

Unless there is same major braketrough in master's way the line of sight is calculated (kinda dubious too)... But then I dont see any major stoppers to reintroduce that code at that point.

And the other way around : if there is any revolutionnary "fix" that I find for my code, we will have the time to port it in master I guess.

On the other hand... If you have the energy to synch the master behavior properly, I guess it will be easy to convert it to half-height to half-height like it is in proj1. Or better : tip to 1/2 height if we dont mind being pie dependent.
Heretic 2.3 improver and proud of it.

Post Reply