Re: buf, buf1, buf2, arg: J J & E

From: Mark Setzer (
Date: 07/21/01

okay, disclaimer: i am not a professional programmer, i have little
experience with C and have struggled somewhat to learn to utilize circle's
functions and whatnot to modify mud behavior (to give an idea of my
experience level.)

hopefully my opinion is still valid, as i have a pretty big problem with
this patch.

using a stock code mud (ie, only modifying world files and such to customize
- or not even that) is a joke. the norm has become to download the codebase
and immediately patch several additions that the ftp site is just rife with.
they're all good.

plus, i have a real problem with people who complain that the unix patch
command and the patchfiles they get off the site are incompatible with their
codebase. granted, it'd be nice to automagically have things update
themselves for you with basically zero time spent efforting them, but at the
very LEAST these newbies should learn their way around the mud.

but, for the people that do NOT have a stock code mud and do NOT want to do
serious patchwork by hand, there are the bundles. Del's bundle comes to mind
as one of the most outstanding collection of useful customizations to the
codebase for the beginning mud entrepreneur. i beg you, don't underestimate
the importance and usefulness of these head starts. how many times have we
referred a newbie to a pre-built bundle?

i'm not in charge of your guys' release cycle. but for crying out loud, even
though we're still in this 3.0 beta stage, do we REALLY need to yank out
code that invalidates the use of the majority of the serious patches for
every previous release?

i also don't know your timetable, but 4 months seems like a pathetically
small amount of time to grant implementers to get with the program. i could
be quite ignorant in my assumption that everyone's not up to date with the
newest releases, but i know i'm not, and it's not laziness. it's justifying
a huge huge huge change to the inner-workings of EXTREMELY frequently used
functions that, yes, would probably make my life easier, but wouldn't for
someone who's looking at an ftp site full of incompatible patches, or a
mailing list with coders harumphing about the latest change.

this is a biggie. and i think that while a lot of progress has been made in
the 3.0 beta cycle, this would be detrimental to keeping everyone up to date
with secure, stable muds. i guess i'm just not informed enough. but i've
come to expect progress in the beta cycle in bits and pieces. this is
probably better suited for the next point release.

hope i haven't offended anyone, i really admire you guys. i'd hate to see
something implemented that hurts more than it helps.


   | FAQ: |
   | Archives: |

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/06/01 PST