View Single Post
Old 08-24-2016, 06:58 PM
ghanja's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Hershey, PA
Posts: 493

Does the "frozen state" denote what it suggests, in that, no more commits what-so-ever? Sounds a little extreme, which is why I'm leaning towards believing that what is meant by it is that, any -active- development would be frozen (i.e. no concentration on the branch/fork? that supports the older clients).

I'm far from as knowledgeable of C++ let alone the EQEMU source which, I feel many would admit, it's a mess (no complaints mind you, but strictly from a technical stand point I am speaking). If being able to work around that source to offer improvements both of functionality and structure/organization of the code while doing so without the fear of "shit, adding that RoF feature now broke this with the older clients", by all means, it would seem it's a dire necessity. If for nothing else but to help keep your sanity. Maybe too, it would allow for cleaning up parts of the code, like qglobal rewrite, who (GD thats a mess), etc. because for all intents and purposes only one client would be supported.

Heck, the inquiry of the public is appreciated, but, in the end, we're at the mercy of those intimately familiar with the source (or those daring enough and with enough time in their lives to become intimate with it), so go with what ensures longevity both as a whole AND of the participating developers. However, I will say, I hope that if a developer doesn't find it to lead to getting burnt out, if a bug fix here or there on the "old master" branch (UF, SoF, etc.) could be done, that would be more ideal to most, I believe?

TL;DR = Game for whatever makes it easier on the project and the developers, albeit, I do hope that the "old master" isn't totally abandoned if a dev could toss it a bug fix or two time to time.