0003026: New Release?

(0007694)
SXX (administrator)
2018-12-04 03:46

I certainly think we might have at least something like 0.99b or something.

I now moved to Vietnam so have more time again and hopefully will be able to do something about it.

(0007695)
By003 (reporter)
2018-12-05 07:41

Maybe AI still need to be improved, I have made a list.
1.AI is lack of goals, They often forget to pick up artifacts or visit the banks,they even don't know how to collect resources and use them.
2.AI has a poor defence action. How calm would they stay if their opposites close to their towns? They don't even recruit any troops.
3.AI always have many heroes, but seldom of them have a large troop. They keep their town with many troops in dwellings, I often find there are 5 weeks production of LV7 creatures in their castle..even using resourceful AI mod! However, if their heroes are defeated, at once they will recruit 8 of them!

I think it's still early for releasing 1.0, because there isn't a very stable work, but 1.0 means finished.

(0007696)
josch (developer)
2018-12-05 08:03

I did not suggest to release a 1.0 version.

I only asked for a release of the current status of vcmi such that the next Debian release would not ship a two-year-old version of vcmi (0.99).

Certainly the state of current git master is much better than it was two years ago so even if AI is still problematic it will be an improvement over 0.99.

(0007697)
By003 (reporter)
2018-12-10 08:46

https://wiki.vcmi.eu/Building_bonuses [^]

Could you finish building bonuses in next release version?

(0007700)
josch (developer)
2018-12-21 12:04

Hi SXX, did you have a chance to ask the other vcmi developers about a possible 0.99b release?

If you don't like to make a new release, I'd need to know whether you'd be okay with me packaging a git snapshot instead.

Thanks!

(0007708)
josch (developer)
2019-01-27 00:42

Hi all, not much more than a week is left until Debian freezes. What is the stance of the vcmi developers? Should I keep 0.99 in Debian? Should I package a certain git commit? Will there still be a 0.99b release within the next week?

(0007709)
AVS (administrator)
2019-01-27 01:06
edited on: 2019-01-27 01:13

@josch Current git develop is much more stable and functional than 0.99. Call it 0.99a :) I doubt we`ll manage to make official release in a week.

(0007710)
AVS (administrator)
2019-01-27 02:23

I`ve synchronized main branches. Now they all points to same revision.

(0007711)
SXX (administrator)
2019-01-27 02:48

@josch btw how many days exactly?
I'd wish to find time to make semi-official builds for other platforms, but as Alex said it's might be not quite possible.

(0007712)
josch (developer)
2019-01-27 09:44

The soft freeze starts at 2019-02-12. Starting that date, only "small, targeted fixes" may be uploaded. And the upload of a new release would not count as such. Additionally, packages need at least three days to migrate from unstable to testing, so the last day to upload is actually 2019-02-09. And then there is also the new version of fuzzylite 6.0 I'd have to upload together with vcmi.

@AVS: if you say that git develop is much more stable and functional than 0.99, then I would just package a git snapshot of the development branch today.

@SXX: if you manage to make a 0.99a release early enough, then I can just upload that right afterwards.

Would that course of action be okay for everybody?

(0007713)
SXX (administrator)
2019-01-27 09:47

This seems like a good plan.

If there actually a week of time then I could really manage to get enough of free time to package proper release for other platforms too.

(0007714)
AVS (administrator)
2019-01-27 09:56

@josch upload master branch not develop. (master branch updated for you, master=develop right now but this may change at any moment).

(0007715)
AVS (administrator)
2019-01-27 09:58

@SXX you can update release with platform builds after release itself

(0007716)
SXX (administrator)
2019-01-27 09:59

I still really wish to make at least some testing of stability / play-ability before that.

(0007717)
josch (developer)
2019-01-27 18:53

Okay, I now uploaded fuzzylite 6.0 and am waiting for other members of Debian to approve that upload:

https://ftp-master.debian.org/new/fuzzylite_6.0+dfsg-1.html [^]

After it gets accepted I will upload a snapshot of the vcmi master branch (or of a new release if one appears before then).

(0007718)
josch (developer)
2019-01-29 09:27

I didn't investigate the issue yet, but did you change something with the rpath during the past two years? The produced binaries don't seem to have the rpath set anymore, so they cannot find libvcmi.so.

(0007719)
SXX (administrator)
2019-01-29 09:33

It's very much possible I could've messed something up when I made build adjustments for macOS.

(0007720)
AVS (administrator)
2019-01-29 14:55

https://github.com/vcmi/vcmi/commit/40af43c46edf21064dfc5db1584bfe91107f7ad1 [^]

Suspicious part: two lines were removed

SET(CMAKE_INSTALL_RPATH "${CMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX}/${CMAKE_INSTALL_LIBDIR}/vcmi")
SET(CMAKE_INSTALL_RPATH_USE_LINK_PATH TRUE)

(0007721)
josch (developer)
2019-01-29 16:29

Bingo! I now use the following to successfully configure and build vcmi:

-DCMAKE_INSTALL_RPATH_USE_LINK_PATH=ON -DCMAKE_INSTALL_RPATH=/usr/lib/$(DEB_HOST_MULTIARCH)/vcmi -DBIN_DIR=games -DFORCE_BUNDLED_FL=OFF

(0007722)
josch (developer)
2019-02-01 23:06

I now uploaded the snapshot of the master branch to Debian unstable and thus it will very likely be part of the next Debian stable release. There is still a problem with fuzzylite 6.0 on i386. Is anybody running vcmi on i386 and saw weird AI behavior?

A suggestion: You could also name the next version 0.100 and then after that 0.101, 0.102 and so on. Maybe what stopped you from continuing to do regular releases for over two years was, that you tried making the next release the 1.00 release? But the logical next increment after 0.97, 0.98 and 0.99 is 0.100 and not 1.00.

(0007723)
AVS (administrator)
2019-02-02 01:48
edited on: 2019-02-02 14:16

@josch
1) could you please file a more detailed report about fuzzylite 6.0 on i386
2) if current snapshot will be part of the next Debian stable then next release will be 0.100
3) if current snapshot will NOT be part of next Debian stable then next release will be 0.99a (or smth like 0.100~beta1)
4) 1.0 when it come will indicate at least no missing features from original game, there are a few still.

(0007724)
josch (developer)
2019-02-02 03:13

@AVS
1) will do
2+3) why do you make your versioning dependent on vcmi's inclusion in the next Debian stable?
4) yes, that's what I suspected and it makes sense :)

(0007725)
AVS (administrator)
2019-02-02 03:42
edited on: 2019-02-02 14:16

@josch
2+3) It is a special case for this release, because the current release is actually a fix for this issue. Better solution is release 0.100~beta1 "now", and finish release cycle normally (it was 3-4 pre releases usually in past) with 0.100 in a few weeks. Is there any chance that Debian Buster will contain 0.100 (but not 0.99+dfsg+git20190113 or 0.100~beta1) in the end?

(0007726)
josch (developer)
2019-02-02 09:55

Until 2019-03-12 "small, targeted fixes" are still allowed. If you make a 0.100 release or a 0.100~beta1 release with no big changes compared to 0.99+dfsg+git20190113, then I guess that I could still upload it. ^^

(you writing 1.100~beta1 was probably a typo and you meant 0.100~beta1 actually?)

(0007727)
josch (developer)
2019-02-03 23:48

1) the fuzzylite problem on i386 turned out to be harmless and was just about slight differences in how floating point computations were rounded: https://github.com/fuzzylite/fuzzylite/issues/89 [^]

(0007743)
AVS (administrator)
2019-02-08 09:21

* Git master snapshot package has been migrated to testing in Debian
* New release process started (see https://github.com/vcmi/vcmi/pull/543 [^])

(0007769)
josch (developer)
2019-03-01 17:04

Tomorrow is the last day I can do any uploads that will end in the next Debian stable. If nothing is released by then, version 0.99+dfsg+git20190113.f06c8a87-1 will become part of Debian buster. Thanks!

Notes
(0007694) SXX (administrator) 2018-12-04 03:46	I certainly think we might have at least something like 0.99b or something. I now moved to Vietnam so have more time again and hopefully will be able to do something about it.

(0007695) By003 (reporter) 2018-12-05 07:41	Maybe AI still need to be improved, I have made a list. 1.AI is lack of goals, They often forget to pick up artifacts or visit the banks,they even don't know how to collect resources and use them. 2.AI has a poor defence action. How calm would they stay if their opposites close to their towns? They don't even recruit any troops. 3.AI always have many heroes, but seldom of them have a large troop. They keep their town with many troops in dwellings, I often find there are 5 weeks production of LV7 creatures in their castle..even using resourceful AI mod! However, if their heroes are defeated, at once they will recruit 8 of them! I think it's still early for releasing 1.0, because there isn't a very stable work, but 1.0 means finished.

(0007696) josch (developer) 2018-12-05 08:03	I did not suggest to release a 1.0 version. I only asked for a release of the current status of vcmi such that the next Debian release would not ship a two-year-old version of vcmi (0.99). Certainly the state of current git master is much better than it was two years ago so even if AI is still problematic it will be an improvement over 0.99.

(0007697) By003 (reporter) 2018-12-10 08:46	https://wiki.vcmi.eu/Building_bonuses [^] Could you finish building bonuses in next release version?

(0007700) josch (developer) 2018-12-21 12:04	Hi SXX, did you have a chance to ask the other vcmi developers about a possible 0.99b release? If you don't like to make a new release, I'd need to know whether you'd be okay with me packaging a git snapshot instead. Thanks!

(0007708) josch (developer) 2019-01-27 00:42	Hi all, not much more than a week is left until Debian freezes. What is the stance of the vcmi developers? Should I keep 0.99 in Debian? Should I package a certain git commit? Will there still be a 0.99b release within the next week?

(0007709) AVS (administrator) 2019-01-27 01:06 edited on: 2019-01-27 01:13	@josch Current git develop is much more stable and functional than 0.99. Call it 0.99a :) I doubt we`ll manage to make official release in a week.

(0007710) AVS (administrator) 2019-01-27 02:23	I`ve synchronized main branches. Now they all points to same revision.

(0007711) SXX (administrator) 2019-01-27 02:48	@josch btw how many days exactly? I'd wish to find time to make semi-official builds for other platforms, but as Alex said it's might be not quite possible.

(0007712) josch (developer) 2019-01-27 09:44	The soft freeze starts at 2019-02-12. Starting that date, only "small, targeted fixes" may be uploaded. And the upload of a new release would not count as such. Additionally, packages need at least three days to migrate from unstable to testing, so the last day to upload is actually 2019-02-09. And then there is also the new version of fuzzylite 6.0 I'd have to upload together with vcmi. @AVS: if you say that git develop is much more stable and functional than 0.99, then I would just package a git snapshot of the development branch today. @SXX: if you manage to make a 0.99a release early enough, then I can just upload that right afterwards. Would that course of action be okay for everybody?

(0007713) SXX (administrator) 2019-01-27 09:47	This seems like a good plan. If there actually a week of time then I could really manage to get enough of free time to package proper release for other platforms too.

(0007714) AVS (administrator) 2019-01-27 09:56	@josch upload master branch not develop. (master branch updated for you, master=develop right now but this may change at any moment).

(0007715) AVS (administrator) 2019-01-27 09:58	@SXX you can update release with platform builds after release itself

(0007716) SXX (administrator) 2019-01-27 09:59	I still really wish to make at least some testing of stability / play-ability before that.

(0007717) josch (developer) 2019-01-27 18:53	Okay, I now uploaded fuzzylite 6.0 and am waiting for other members of Debian to approve that upload: https://ftp-master.debian.org/new/fuzzylite_6.0+dfsg-1.html [^] After it gets accepted I will upload a snapshot of the vcmi master branch (or of a new release if one appears before then).

(0007718) josch (developer) 2019-01-29 09:27	I didn't investigate the issue yet, but did you change something with the rpath during the past two years? The produced binaries don't seem to have the rpath set anymore, so they cannot find libvcmi.so.

(0007719) SXX (administrator) 2019-01-29 09:33	It's very much possible I could've messed something up when I made build adjustments for macOS.

(0007720) AVS (administrator) 2019-01-29 14:55	https://github.com/vcmi/vcmi/commit/40af43c46edf21064dfc5db1584bfe91107f7ad1 [^] Suspicious part: two lines were removed SET(CMAKE_INSTALL_RPATH "${CMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX}/${CMAKE_INSTALL_LIBDIR}/vcmi") SET(CMAKE_INSTALL_RPATH_USE_LINK_PATH TRUE)

(0007721) josch (developer) 2019-01-29 16:29	Bingo! I now use the following to successfully configure and build vcmi: -DCMAKE_INSTALL_RPATH_USE_LINK_PATH=ON -DCMAKE_INSTALL_RPATH=/usr/lib/$(DEB_HOST_MULTIARCH)/vcmi -DBIN_DIR=games -DFORCE_BUNDLED_FL=OFF

(0007722) josch (developer) 2019-02-01 23:06	I now uploaded the snapshot of the master branch to Debian unstable and thus it will very likely be part of the next Debian stable release. There is still a problem with fuzzylite 6.0 on i386. Is anybody running vcmi on i386 and saw weird AI behavior? A suggestion: You could also name the next version 0.100 and then after that 0.101, 0.102 and so on. Maybe what stopped you from continuing to do regular releases for over two years was, that you tried making the next release the 1.00 release? But the logical next increment after 0.97, 0.98 and 0.99 is 0.100 and not 1.00.

(0007723) AVS (administrator) 2019-02-02 01:48 edited on: 2019-02-02 14:16	@josch 1) could you please file a more detailed report about fuzzylite 6.0 on i386 2) if current snapshot will be part of the next Debian stable then next release will be 0.100 3) if current snapshot will NOT be part of next Debian stable then next release will be 0.99a (or smth like 0.100~beta1) 4) 1.0 when it come will indicate at least no missing features from original game, there are a few still.

(0007724) josch (developer) 2019-02-02 03:13	@AVS 1) will do 2+3) why do you make your versioning dependent on vcmi's inclusion in the next Debian stable? 4) yes, that's what I suspected and it makes sense :)

(0007725) AVS (administrator) 2019-02-02 03:42 edited on: 2019-02-02 14:16	@josch 2+3) It is a special case for this release, because the current release is actually a fix for this issue. Better solution is release 0.100~beta1 "now", and finish release cycle normally (it was 3-4 pre releases usually in past) with 0.100 in a few weeks. Is there any chance that Debian Buster will contain 0.100 (but not 0.99+dfsg+git20190113 or 0.100~beta1) in the end?

(0007726) josch (developer) 2019-02-02 09:55	Until 2019-03-12 "small, targeted fixes" are still allowed. If you make a 0.100 release or a 0.100~beta1 release with no big changes compared to 0.99+dfsg+git20190113, then I guess that I could still upload it. ^^ (you writing 1.100~beta1 was probably a typo and you meant 0.100~beta1 actually?)

(0007727) josch (developer) 2019-02-03 23:48	1) the fuzzylite problem on i386 turned out to be harmless and was just about slight differences in how floating point computations were rounded: https://github.com/fuzzylite/fuzzylite/issues/89 [^]

(0007743) AVS (administrator) 2019-02-08 09:21	* Git master snapshot package has been migrated to testing in Debian * New release process started (see https://github.com/vcmi/vcmi/pull/543 [^])

(0007769) josch (developer) 2019-03-01 17:04	Tomorrow is the last day I can do any uploads that will end in the next Debian stable. If nothing is released by then, version 0.99+dfsg+git20190113.f06c8a87-1 will become part of Debian buster. Thanks!

Issue History
Date Modified	Username	Field	Change
2018-12-03 21:38	josch	New Issue
2018-12-04 03:46	SXX	Note Added: 0007694
2018-12-05 07:41	By003	Note Added: 0007695
2018-12-05 08:03	josch	Note Added: 0007696
2018-12-10 08:46	By003	Note Added: 0007697
2018-12-21 12:04	josch	Note Added: 0007700
2019-01-27 00:42	josch	Note Added: 0007708
2019-01-27 01:06	AVS	Note Added: 0007709
2019-01-27 01:13	AVS	Note Edited: 0007709	View Revisions
2019-01-27 02:23	AVS	Note Added: 0007710
2019-01-27 02:48	SXX	Note Added: 0007711
2019-01-27 09:44	josch	Note Added: 0007712
2019-01-27 09:47	SXX	Note Added: 0007713
2019-01-27 09:56	AVS	Note Added: 0007714
2019-01-27 09:58	AVS	Note Added: 0007715
2019-01-27 09:59	SXX	Note Added: 0007716
2019-01-27 18:53	josch	Note Added: 0007717
2019-01-29 09:27	josch	Note Added: 0007718
2019-01-29 09:33	SXX	Note Added: 0007719
2019-01-29 14:55	AVS	Note Added: 0007720
2019-01-29 16:29	josch	Note Added: 0007721
2019-02-01 23:06	josch	Note Added: 0007722
2019-02-02 01:48	AVS	Note Added: 0007723
2019-02-02 03:13	josch	Note Added: 0007724
2019-02-02 03:42	AVS	Note Added: 0007725
2019-02-02 09:55	josch	Note Added: 0007726
2019-02-02 14:16	AVS	Note Edited: 0007723	View Revisions
2019-02-02 14:16	AVS	Note Edited: 0007725	View Revisions
2019-02-03 23:48	josch	Note Added: 0007727
2019-02-08 09:21	AVS	Note Added: 0007743
2019-02-08 09:21	AVS	Status	new => resolved
2019-02-08 09:21	AVS	Fixed in Version	=> 1.next
2019-02-08 09:21	AVS	Resolution	open => fixed
2019-02-08 09:21	AVS	Assigned To	=> josch
2019-03-01 17:04	josch	Note Added: 0007769

Relationships