Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-sorcery - Re: [SM-Sorcery]sorcery: stable/devel spells

sm-sorcery AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Discussion of Sorcery related topics

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Dufflebunk <dufflebunk AT dufflebunk.homeip.net>
  • To: Nick Jennings <nkj AT namodn.com>
  • Cc: Ryan Abrams <rabrams AT sourcemage.org>, sm-sorcery AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Sorcery]sorcery: stable/devel spells
  • Date: 09 Sep 2002 14:12:23 -0400

Something just occured to me... we could have THREE sorcery spells. Add
a sorcery spell which is a meta spell to the other two.
Thoughts? Problems?


On Mon, 2002-09-09 at 14:03, Nick Jennings wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 09, 2002 at 07:11:00AM -0500, Ryan Abrams wrote:
> > Nick,
> >
> > Like I said, I may be, and probably am wrong. But I think the idea of a
> > single spell is valuable enough that I am going to spend some time
> > proving that to myself. I am not trying to discount your evaluation of
> > the situation. I am just saying that I think there is a way to make it
> > work (though it may be a crazy hack in the spell)
> --------------------------------------------
>
> I refuse to use a "crazy hack" because I do not think it's ok to "make
> the exception" for sorcery.
>
> I agree with everyone else, the idea of making a spell which:
>
> A) Provides two branches (devel or stable) which are mutually exclusive
> B) Allow you to keep track of the version installed in the standard
> "sorcery way" (i.e. gaze installed <spellname>)
> C) Simultaneously "magically" updating the version number
>
> Is a very attractive feature. *However* no one thought enough of it to
> include it in the list of features for 1.0, and I never heard a peep about
> it myself until you asked me to "hack it in" to the sorcery spell.
>
> There are other features, which *are* on the roadmap, that I think are
> much more important (i.e. no way to get around them). The fact is, the
> spells are not flexible enough for this. They *need* a VERSION number
> and it *needs* to be manually updated, the grimoire team knows this
> and has been dealing with it. I have absolutely no probels in being the
> one who updates the version number for sorcery-stable whenever there is
> a new release, big deal.
>
> The one suggestiong for a fix I've heard, is simply having that version
> be 'stable' or 'devel' which is *not* ok (and in my opinion sucks way more
> than having two spells, I mean come on!?), we absolutely have to have a
> 'gaze installed sorcery' produce the version of sorcery you have
> installed.
> If the branch is 'devel' the version should be the date string it was
> installed on.
>
>
> > I think Nathan's suggestion is a good one in fact, though it may not
> > fix everything.
>
> See my response to his post.
>
>
> > Don't worry, I will not overwrite your work. If you have something
> > working, I won't break it unless i have something better tested,
> > working, and discussed among the group /after/ it's written. In the
> > meantime, I will save it as something like "sorcery-new" or some such.
> >
> > I just am not thrilled about all our users switching from sorcery to
> > sorcery-X and back again, simply because we couldn't find a way to fix
> > the sorcery spell in the first place.
>
> What are you talking about? I fixed the sorcery spell by reverting it
> back to "the way it's meant to be". It was broken when we tried to
> do it otherwise.
>
> I don't think users are going to have too much trouble with the fact
> that there is a 'sorcery-stable' and 'sorcery-devel' spell. Most wont
> even have to deal with it, as they can just make the selection from
> the sorcery menu, and be done with it.
>
> I think the main problem is the developers who would rather cause bugs
> and problems making a hack, rather than just accepting the fact that
> we did not properly work this out early enough (and make real features
> which support this behavior).
>
> --
> Nick Jennings
> Sorcery Team Lead
>
> _______________________________________________
> SM-Sorcery mailing list
> SM-Sorcery AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-sorcery
>
--


Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.
-----------------
PGP public key at
http://wwwkeys.ch.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x92B5D3F1

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page