Glider⠠⠵
Global Moderator
Sr. Member
Posts: 454
⠠⠵
|
 |
« on: December 29, 2012, 08:03:34 AM » |
|
So how do you guys feel about the war3source extension? How do you feel about shopmenu2?
I personally really dislike it. It makes things more complex without really providing any sort of benefit. I would prefer writing it off as a non successful idea and removing it from the war3source core.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Necavi
|
|
« Reply #1 on: December 29, 2012, 08:13:59 AM » |
|
It was evidently meant to give Ownz an option for monetizing War3Source, but as I said to him, it makes sense to get war3source popular before worrying about that kind of thing (Not that I'd want it in the first place, evidently all of the War3Source services cost ~$5/month). I would be in favor of either rewriting it in sourcepawn or removing it altogether, as most people seem to disable it in the first place.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Revan
|
|
« Reply #2 on: December 29, 2012, 08:47:04 AM » |
|
I dislike the way how the extension was done. It just terminates the server if the extension helper isn't verified. I'm either for a rewrite/fix for this or a rewrite in sourcepawn. Removing it should also be acceptable, shopmenu2 just overcomplicates stuff for the average player.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: December 29, 2012, 08:48:59 AM by Revan »
|
Logged
|
#war3source
|
|
|
|
-El Diablo
|
|
« Reply #3 on: December 29, 2012, 03:59:58 PM » |
|
Shopmenu 2 needs to be done so that it does not require a website to always be connected.
I do love shopmenu2 in that it has diamonds and a different way to show players a list of different items. Being.. these items last a whole map.
I would love to see a shopmenu3 that has items that players can buy that are perm to the database / table. <<-- if this can not be developed ... I'll eventually write the code. I just would like a good starting place where I can setup the database how I see it should hold items.. Shall I start a Topic on Shopmenu 3 and how I would see a future in it?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Necavi
|
|
« Reply #4 on: December 29, 2012, 06:52:56 PM » |
|
Create a different bloody name if you do that  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
-El Diablo
|
|
« Reply #5 on: December 29, 2012, 08:08:37 PM » |
|
When you start charging for items and stuff on a server, it marks your server as a pay2win server and people do not like it.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Glider⠠⠵
Global Moderator
Sr. Member
Posts: 454
⠠⠵
|
|
« Reply #6 on: December 29, 2012, 08:09:26 PM » |
|
I don't want 3 different shopmenus in the core. I think one shopmenu is good enough. I have no problem with phasing out shopmenu2 or doing a shopenu3 (both with better names/integration..) in a optional addon that can be downloaded, but for the core I think it makes things way to complicated for both players and developers.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
-El Diablo
|
|
« Reply #7 on: December 29, 2012, 08:21:17 PM » |
|
Our server own Juanthepally is hosting to the crowd of players whom can understand complex methods, and they are dieing to see our shopmenu3... If war3source does not want this, that is fine. We will have it on our GitHub for those whom want it when we complete it. I can't count the number of players whom have requested complex races and ideas that would not go well with a beginner player. I guess it all depends on the crowd you are hosting. If the crowd you are targeting is beginners, then that is the crowd you will get. We just do what short order cooks do.. put them to work on a Friday night and hope they make it. If they don't make it, there are other people who can make it. I continually hear keep it simple from war3source crowd, and yes, that is okay. But we plan to make it as complex as possible. Feel free to grab code from us as we will grab updates and merge from your code. Since there is a lot of translation file differences because of the RACE to JOB translation difference, we'll do the work of merging to and from war3source main github. https://github.com/ElDiabloW3E/war3evo |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Glider⠠⠵
Global Moderator
Sr. Member
Posts: 454
⠠⠵
|
|
« Reply #8 on: December 29, 2012, 08:51:54 PM » |
|
Like I said, I'm ok with having it as an addon, but not in the core. It's too complicated for it's own sake. Like try getting the extension to compile and run on l4d, good luck with that! I'd make a l4d branch that works out of the box on l4d servers if it weren't for having to write shitty workarounds so the extension doesn't spew errors everywhere.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Necavi
|
|
« Reply #9 on: December 29, 2012, 08:54:08 PM » |
|
I concur with completely dropping it, possibly having an addon do it later. I'd like to see ownz weigh in before we make a final decision, however.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Ownz
|
|
« Reply #10 on: December 29, 2012, 10:36:44 PM » |
|
you have my permission to phase out the extension(s)
it was also intended to function as an automatic update download tool, as socket and other useful C functions was lacking on pawn.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
 DarkEnergy |
|
|
|
Revan
|
|
« Reply #11 on: December 30, 2012, 05:34:32 AM » |
|
you have my permission to phase out the extension(s)
it was also intended to function as an automatic update download tool, as socket and other useful C functions was lacking on pawn.
I'm currently working on a updater, however, I consider making it more a manual updater(ConCmd or something similar). The updater can be done in pawn, war3source already ships with the SM socket extension. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: December 30, 2012, 05:37:06 AM by Revan »
|
Logged
|
#war3source
|
|
|
|
Necavi
|
|
« Reply #12 on: December 30, 2012, 05:42:59 AM » |
|
I definitely think that manual updating is the way to go, something like, "Your war3source installation is out of date! Run <cmd> to update!" instead of the current message. Server ops HAVE to keep that as a choice, not have it forced onto them.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
-El Diablo
|
|
« Reply #13 on: December 30, 2012, 06:42:13 AM » |
|
Yeah. No forcing updates.
Allow them to turn checking off.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Ownz
|
|
« Reply #14 on: December 30, 2012, 12:36:18 PM » |
|
updating is more complex than you think. what about interface changes that require recompiles? not everyone is going to be using stock. how will you verify downloaded smx? beware of how sockets work, the privide reliable communication and notification of failure, but if http server sends you something but properly closes the connection, you don't know if the plugin received is the entire plugin. you will have to invent / implement a integrity check (your own, or md5 sha etc)
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
DarkEnergy |
|
|
|
Remy Lebeau
|
|
« Reply #15 on: December 30, 2012, 03:21:50 PM » |
|
I'm not a huge fan of allowing updates from within the plugin. On our server for example, the owners would have sufficient access to run the command (oh look, server needs an update better run this command) - however I've modified a number of the core files, which would mean any (semi)automated update would nuke them.
If someone has managed to install the plugin in the first place, they can manage an update manually. - Perhaps allow a notification of a new version, but certainly not an updater.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Revan
|
|
« Reply #16 on: December 30, 2012, 03:39:42 PM » |
|
updating is more complex than you think. what about interface changes that require recompiles? not everyone is going to be using stock. how will you verify downloaded smx? beware of how sockets work, the privide reliable communication and notification of failure, but if http server sends you something but properly closes the connection, you don't know if the plugin received is the entire plugin. you will have to invent / implement a integrity check (your own, or md5 sha etc)
I already thought about that, MD5 should do just fine. It will not replace files with different checksums(such as incomplete downloads or modified plugins). I'm not a huge fan of allowing updates from within the plugin. On our server for example, the owners would have sufficient access to run the command (oh look, server needs an update better run this command) - however I've modified a number of the core files, which would mean any (semi)automated update would nuke them.
If someone has managed to install the plugin in the first place, they can manage an update manually. - Perhaps allow a notification of a new version, but certainly not an updater.
Exactly, thats one of the reason why it is a manual updater. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
#war3source
|
|
|
|
Necavi
|
|
« Reply #17 on: December 30, 2012, 03:43:14 PM » |
|
Remy, we're doing everything we can do to support customized War3Source versions, you have nothing to worry about in that regard.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Ownz
|
|
« Reply #18 on: December 30, 2012, 06:47:55 PM » |
|
updater is for those who continue to use the stock version. for others, there are several options:
modify stock branch to suit your needs without breaking existing functionality
use an addon
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
DarkEnergy |
|
|
|
Remy Lebeau
|
|
« Reply #19 on: December 30, 2012, 09:12:59 PM » |
|
(perhaps I'm stating the obvious, but better safe than sorry) - does that mean that the updater itself will be an easily disabled addon?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Necavi
|
|
« Reply #20 on: December 30, 2012, 09:16:34 PM » |
|
Yes, although unless you run the console command it will ONLY do the same thing as it does now, report that you are out of date.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
