Re: NitroHack 4.0.0 release
- From: Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 00:31:24 +0100
On 17.01.2012 23:26, Patric Mueller wrote:
Jonadab the Unsightly One <jonadab.theunsightlyone@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Just going from the changelog, it looks to be exactly what the nethack
community needs and has been lacking: a fork that's conservative
about gameplay changes and thus can be readily accepted as a
straightforward upgrade from vanilla. Not that the existing forks are
all bad, but the ones I'm familiar with are all clearly _variants_.
You make it sound like it's bad to be a variant. [...]
You misread/misinterpreted what he wrote, I fear.
This one looks much more like it has the potential to be the fork that
eventually obviates and takes the place of the codebase it was forked
from.)
What do you need an upgrade for when you don't change anything?
Erm.. - "...when you don't change *anything*" - ??? I suspect
you meant to ask; "...when you don't change any game-play feature"?
But the point was about a reliable, extensible, and flexible code
architecture base (as a prerequisite for a source code base for a
new version and new variants).
Janis
.
- Prev by Date: Re: NitroHack 4.0.0 release
- Next by Date: Re: NitroHack 4.0.0 release
- Previous by thread: Re: NitroHack 4.0.0 release
- Next by thread: Re: NitroHack 4.0.0 release
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
