sm-sorcery AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Discussion of Sorcery related topics
List archive
- From: "Ryan Abrams" <rabrams AT sourcemage.org>
- To: "Nick Jennings" <nkj AT namodn.com>
- Cc: <sm-sorcery AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: Re: [SM-Sorcery]sorcery: stable/devel spells
- Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2002 13:53:41 -0500
> Great, so you patch the hacked up sorcery spell, fix the symptoms that
> have occured, and pat yourself on the back.
Nick,
With all due respect, you have /no/ idea how I plan on implementing it.
Criticizing my implementation before you even know what it is going to be
makes you look foolish. Especially since I ranted yesterday about NOT
patching symptoms instead of causes.
My decision to try and fix this problem instead of routing around it is not
a personal attack. I don't think I have made it one, and I would appreciate
it if you wouldn't either.
-Ryan
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nick Jennings" <nkj AT namodn.com>
To: "Ryan Abrams" <rabrams AT sourcemage.org>
Cc: <sm-sorcery AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Monday, September 09, 2002 1:42 PM
Subject: Re: [SM-Sorcery]sorcery: stable/devel spells
> On Mon, Sep 09, 2002 at 01:00:38PM -0500, Ryan Abrams wrote:
> > > 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).
> >
> > We will have to agree to disagree on this. I dont think /any/ developers
> > "would rather cause bugs and problems making a hack" - I think the
> > difference is that some developers would rather keep trying to truly fix
the
> > problems causes (which honestly doesnt seem that hard to fix) instead of
> > just giving up to work on something else.
>
> I agree that no developers would rather cause bugs and problems, that
> was a bit extreme. However, I think you trying to say your methods
> (as described below) are "truly fixing the problem" is ridiculous.
>
> See below.
>
> > The way I understand it, the issues are twofold..
> >
> > 1) SORCERY_BRANCH didn't always work. Easy to fix imho.
> > 2) The version isnt set correctly when installed. Also easy to fix,
imho.
>
You haven't truly fixed
> anything, and what you have done is certainly not something wich would
> be transferable to any other spell (unless you want to further include
> grimoire variables, and settings in the sorcery config - which is
> already going overboard).
>
> Unless a new grimoire feature for spells which want to provide different
> branches of the same app. is implemented, you are not truly fixing the
> problem. I have other things to work on which fix problems that cannot
> be satisfied in any other way (splitting sorcery fixes the problem, plain
> and simple) so feel free to own it. If you can't truly fix the problem,
> then I wont accept the hack Ryan. I don't think it's worth it by any
> means. It's just two stupid spells! who cares that much to where they
> are willing to accept strange bugs, and behavior unlike any other spell
> in the grimoire!? It's not *that* cool of a feature.
>
> --
> Nick Jennings
> Sorcery Team Lead
>
-
Re: [SM-Sorcery]sorcery: stable/devel spells
, (continued)
-
Re: [SM-Sorcery]sorcery: stable/devel spells,
Ryan Abrams, 09/08/2002
-
Re: [SM-Sorcery]sorcery: stable/devel spells,
Nick Jennings, 09/08/2002
- Re: [SM-Sorcery]sorcery: stable/devel spells, Seth Woolley, 09/09/2002
-
Re: [SM-Sorcery]sorcery: stable/devel spells,
Ryan Abrams, 09/09/2002
-
Re: [SM-Sorcery]sorcery: stable/devel spells,
Nick Jennings, 09/09/2002
-
Re: [SM-Sorcery]sorcery: stable/devel spells,
Ryan Abrams, 09/09/2002
-
Re: [SM-Sorcery]sorcery: stable/devel spells,
Nick Jennings, 09/09/2002
- Re: [SM-Sorcery]sorcery: stable/devel spells, Nick Jennings, 09/09/2002
- Re: [SM-Sorcery]sorcery: stable/devel spells, Ryan Abrams, 09/09/2002
- Re: [SM-Sorcery]sorcery: stable/devel spells, Dufflebunk, 09/09/2002
- Re: [SM-Sorcery]sorcery: stable/devel spells, Ryan Abrams, 09/09/2002
- Re: [SM-Sorcery]sorcery: stable/devel spells, Nick Jennings, 09/09/2002
- Re: [SM-Sorcery]sorcery: stable/devel spells, Ryan Abrams, 09/09/2002
-
Re: [SM-Sorcery]sorcery: stable/devel spells,
Nick Jennings, 09/09/2002
-
Re: [SM-Sorcery]sorcery: stable/devel spells,
Ryan Abrams, 09/09/2002
-
Re: [SM-Sorcery]sorcery: stable/devel spells,
Nick Jennings, 09/09/2002
-
Re: [SM-Sorcery]sorcery: stable/devel spells,
Dufflebunk, 09/09/2002
- Re: [SM-Sorcery]sorcery: stable/devel spells, Nick Jennings, 09/09/2002
-
Re: [SM-Sorcery]sorcery: stable/devel spells,
Nick Jennings, 09/08/2002
-
Re: [SM-Sorcery]sorcery: stable/devel spells,
Ryan Abrams, 09/08/2002
- Re: [SM-Sorcery]sorcery: stable/devel spells, Nick Jennings, 09/09/2002
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.