Discussion Most stable Interlude pack

[Elfo]

a

Edited October 1, 2021 by Elfocrash

[Tryskell]

2 hours ago, Elfocrash said:

Jesus christ, I mean I've been very open on how critical I am about aCis and Tryskell but cmon, there is absolutely no way you can deny that it is by far the best interlude option when it comes to free packs, and yes I consider aCis to be a free pack. 10 euros for 10 revisions which is like a year, is nothing.

 

Reading things like "I couldn't create an event here" is just ridiculous. Yeah the aCis API has changed quite a lot but this is software development. If the criteria to create something is how familiar you are with the codebase then, sorry to break it for you, but you won't do much in the software development industry. Even by saying that shows that you don't have what I think is the best quality that Tryskell has, and that is determination, focus and consistency. Absolutely no-one (when it comes to a single person) hasn't been so consistent with so little return on investment. 

 

I can burst my two eyes and die peacefully after that unexpected twist.

 

You should maybe wait the payment before telling all those lies. 

Edited July 4, 2019 by Tryskell

[Rootware]

13 hours ago, aLzhite said:

@Tryskell @Rootware oh btw if u not satisfied enough i will give you my pc via teamviewer so u can build&test ur failure by urself. 100$ to access.

 

Give me IP of your server and login/pass for 10 min. I will check your ultra FPS with my client what you not scammed all with modified non server side.

[Elfo]

a

Edited October 1, 2021 by Elfocrash

[SweeTs]

I like that drama. Yet I don't read posts longer than 100 chars, mainly Stinky' and that 'I can code from scratch' guy.

 

Right 

 

Elfo, such a goOd boy. Yo yo.

[StinkyMadness]

On 7/4/2019 at 10:58 PM, SweeTs said:

I like that drama. Yet I don't read posts longer than 100 chars, mainly Stinky' and that 'I can code from scratch' guy.

 

Right 

 

Elfo, such a goOd boy. Yo yo.

I'm wrong? When somebody can't fix an error and he said he can create source from scratch ?

[Trance]

Keeping the same coding style for the whole project is how L2J got started in the first place. Acis is the only fork that keeps doing that. Other projects are already bad just by letting every developer doing whatever they want on the project - this is not how programming works and definitely not how you would get a real job as a programmer either. Tryskell did a great job on analyzing every single line before committing it, making sure his project has the same coding style everywhere. Having 2 classes written in 2 or more coding styles is not the way to go. That's why he doesn't commit every single "hot" fix. If some of you don't know what I'm talking about, don't even call yourself a programmer or developer.

Edited July 10, 2019 by Trance

[Elfo]

a

Edited October 1, 2021 by Elfocrash

[Tryskell]

On 7/10/2019 at 10:24 AM, Elfocrash said:

Well that's not quite true. In the real word you would have to follow some coding guidelines that the organisation or the team has set and one or two people (in this case Tryskell) would have to approve your pull requests (changes requests) in order to get into the codebase. This ofc means that more of Tks time would go to also reviewing pull requests on top of writing what he is working on. Open-source development isn't easy. You can see an example of that in one of my projects here.

 

The main reason why this never worked for aCis is because people couldn't be arsed to help the project. Another problem is that aCis used a centralized version control system (and probably the worst one) Subversion. If it was using a distributed one like git then things could be easier and this transparency and ease of merging would really help. That's only true of course if people wanted to help in the first place which, let's be honest, they didn't.

 

L2J moved to Git, and that didn't help them at all to get more contributions. Of course, teamwork becomes easier, organization is also clearer (you don't have to dig in forums to find back a 2012 diff patch which maybe dissapeared), but if you are alone, there is no synergy. It helps the distribution of your project and the forking of it. Does it suddenly enlighten people to share ? I believe than no. It only helps existing sharers.

 

I still have a lot of contributions to commit, but let's be honest, I have to review everything because most of the time, things are bugged. I only commited ONE shared script without fixing something wrong, for exemple. It's right for every single share. People often don't test all cases.

 

Speaking of the devil...

 

I will probably also move aCis free revision on GitHub. We will see if people shares things or not.

Edited September 16, 2019 by Tryskell

[Elfo]

a

Edited October 1, 2021 by Elfocrash

[Tryskell]

1 hour ago, Elfocrash said:

Yeah, like I said, this change wouldn't help aCis and it wouldn't make people suddenly share because the l2j community just isn't like that anymore. Good to see that you moved to GitHub though.

 

I don't think it's "anymore". The biggest amount never share anything, anytime (only bugs reports when it deserves their server and don't want to care about it). I don't think there was a "period". That's the main reason I moved to a freemium concept extremely fast. The point wasn't to make money, but to say to people "I'm not the only noob working on it, you MUST contribute".

 

Sharers exist since everytime, but in really low quantity. They come and go, which is perfectly normal, but limit their addition to little shares (since for big addition, you need time and dedication). There's a constant flow of shares, even nowadays.

 

Until your "anymore" refer to the lack of interest of people towards L2J, in general. Which is true, but is actually experienced by any real company MMO. Games like PUBG, Fortnite, LoL... Simply sinked out the MMO playerbase. Less players, less money, less admins, less servers, less interest. Without counting the "tries" of Innova / NCSoft themselves (Free GoD, then classic to sink out private servers playerbase).

 

The worst is I can't trust a second person to make what I'm currently doing. I know for sure such person would introduce issues - which would be hard to detect because I won't know exactly what was edited, or if tests were ok. Hasha commits, for exemple, were commited blindly (fast test to see if server was running). That was an error and it introduced a big number of issues (movement being still, one of them - under fix). Some of them took months to be named (dat non monotonic clock System.currentTimeInMillis() uses on bow attack), years to be fixed (mostly because I thought Hasha would fix them - but as I said before, people come and go).

 

And well, if it's to debug/fix another people code... Sometimes it's faster to code it yourself, from zero.

 

I'm in fact the bottleneck (like any "one-head" project leader), but also the security valve.

[Trance]

21 hours ago, Elfocrash said:

Well that's not quite true. In the real word you would have to follow some coding guidelines that the organisation or the team has set and one or two people (in this case Tryskell) would have to approve your pull requests (changes requests) in order to get into the codebase. This ofc means that more of Tks time would go to also reviewing pull requests on top of writing what he is working on. Open-source development isn't easy. You can see an example of that in one of my projects here.

 

The main reason why this never worked for aCis is because people couldn't be arsed to help the project. Another problem is that aCis used a centralized version control system (and probably the worst one) Subversion. If it was using a distributed one like git then things could be easier and this transparency and ease of merging would really help. That's only true of course if people wanted to help in the first place which, let's be honest, they didn't.

 

Well, that's pretty close to what I said.