Re: [OasisOLC] Addition For 2.3

From: Thomas Arp (
Date: 01/14/03

From: "Jordan Naas" <jmn_223@HOTMAIL.COM>
> On 14 Jan 2003 17:53:51 Torgny Bjers <> wrote:
> ----------------------------snip-----------------------------------
> I think you should give this 2.2 release of OasisOLC at good go of half a
> year or so, and several patch releases before you put ANY new features in,
> and I am sure that a lot of other people agree.  Otherwise you'll just
> SMAUG all over again.
> I don't care about the "features" at all, they are entirely secondary.
> I care about stability.  And as it stands now, I have less faith in the
> stability of Oasis than I used to, especially since you seem to spend more
> time thinking up features than you do actually fixing the bugs already
> present in the system, not to mention the bugs created by said features.
> ----------------------------snip-----------------------------------
> I just wanted to say that i personally disagree with these statements.  I
> would like to see the new features added and we can all help Mythran debug
> Oasis as the development goes along.  Certainly adding new features will
> likely create new bugs but(not that i am trying to speak for Mythran or
> anything) nothing says that he cannot debug and add new features at the
> same time. And Personally I think we should all just be glad that
> is doing development on oasis at all.  Thanks Mythran. I also don't think
> we have to worry about it being another Smaug.  He would have to purposely
> put bugs in for that to happen. He he. Thats my two cents.
I prefer the path in the middle. While adding new features is good, one
must keep the perspective. When I download OasisOLC 2.2, I want to get
stuff related to OnLine Creation. Not ASCII pfiles. Not easy color.[1][2]
Also, the use of 'patchlevels' is good, but can be overdone[3]. In
this case I agree with Torgny above. 6 months is a good amount of time
to receive bug reports and to take the time to actually debug the code.

So, in short: I agree with Torgny. Hold on the new features for a bit.
Maintaining a package is more than just adding new stuff. It's also
making sure the stuff you already put out is working correctly.


[1] I was about to write "not a game configuration utility", but thought
    better of it. After all, I haven't seen what you're up to, yet.
    Which incidentally also means I haven't yet taken the time to look
    at the development version you sent me so long ago...

[2] I happen to have made a dirty patch, which actually included way more
    than dg scripts. It's not the way to win popularity contests. Remember,
    your code will also be used to update current running code, which may
    or may not have been altered afterwards.

[3] Look who's talking. I haven't actually advanced dg scripts a single
    version. Not even 1/100. Dg scripts was Version 0.99 pl 7 when I
    started maintaining it. Now we're at v0.99pl9... The newest bugfixes
    should warrant a V1.00, though. *ponder*

Don't you just hate when your footnotes are longer than the actual message?

   | FAQ: |
   | Archives: |
   | Newbie List:   |

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 06/26/03 PDT