The International Simutrans Forum

PakSets and Customization => Pak128 => Topic started by: wernieman on September 20, 2008, 10:01:52 AM

Title: compatibility PAKs
Post by: wernieman on September 20, 2008, 10:01:52 AM
Do we need so much compatibility PAKs? Ore can we take them in a seperate PAK?

So the PAK 128 will be a little bit "smaler"...
Title: Re: compatibility PAKs
Post by: Ashley on September 20, 2008, 10:41:02 AM
Why not take the opportunity, with Simutrans 1.0, to declare a pak128 major revision, which will remove all backwards compatibility and start from scratch? Would allow you to completely restructure pak128 without having to worry about pesky backwards compatibility. Given that Simutrans 1.0, when it happens, will be such a major change I think you'd be justified in a fresh start with one of the major paksets...
Title: Re: compatibility PAKs
Post by: VS on September 20, 2008, 10:48:05 AM
We have the licensing project on its way, slowly, but it exists. Once this "census" is complete, there will be (sadly) many item removed. That is going to be the breaking point, from which onwards old 128 is discontinued.

Compatibility paks do not change, right? Soooooooo... I'll see what can be done about the website, and then make them a separate download.

So many things to do :-/
Title: Re: compatibility PAKs
Post by: prissi on September 20, 2008, 05:48:43 PM
A decent compat.tab could remove the need for most of the stuff in a compatibility pak. Most vehicles have a very similar available, and could simply use this by replacement.

And remember: No need to provide compat.tab RES, COM, IND, as long as the same levels are still there.
Title: Re: compatibility PAKs
Post by: VS on September 20, 2008, 08:56:14 PM
The problem is simple - I do not know what the objects are, and what are their replacements, eventually if they already have some in compat.tab. Together it's not even one whole MB, so... Postponed. If someone wants to dig through these, I do not object.
Title: Re: compatibility PAKs
Post by: wernieman on September 22, 2008, 12:40:05 PM
O.K. ... can I make nightlys without this?

Then we can see, if somebody have a Problem ....
(And in the nightlys there is no garantee to load old savegames ...)
Title: Re: compatibility PAKs
Post by: DirrrtyDirk on September 22, 2008, 02:00:13 PM
Yes, I think we can do that - if people start complaining about problems, we'll know that it's still needed.
Title: Re: compatibility PAKs
Post by: VS on September 22, 2008, 02:05:32 PM
There are many saves with old factories.
Title: Re: compatibility PAKs
Post by: wernieman on September 22, 2008, 02:28:20 PM
Then I must set a "compatibility"-zip-file ......

Next night I use the pakmak.ph, so I don´t want to make changes like this. But in the middle of the week I coul´d ....
Title: Re: compatibility PAKs
Post by: DirrrtyDirk on September 22, 2008, 02:29:15 PM
True - but does that mean that new nightlies need to have these files? I think not. After all it's still wernieman's bandwidth and server space we use. And since these compatibility files don't change, people could get them separately (DL them just once and not with again with every nightly version). And I believe the version for 100.x on sourceforge has these files included, right? So whoever needs them, could get them there, where we don't cause unnecessary server traffic for Werner.

And BTW, with the map editor, people could change old objects to the new ones in their saves... so they could become independent of these files altogether, once they are done with it.
Title: Re: compatibility PAKs
Post by: VS on September 22, 2008, 03:38:10 PM
True. So let's do it!

EDIT: Done. Werner, if you want, you can pack the last folder (1.4.3) and add it as recommended download. But I will upload it to 128.simutrans.com, so better wait a few minutes for link which I will give here...

EDIT2: Please add this link to pak128 part of nightly page (like dlls for executables):
http://128.simutrans.com/download/pak128-compatibility-1.4.3.zip
Title: Re: compatibility PAKs
Post by: wernieman on September 23, 2008, 03:26:38 PM
I must look, where I put the link ...