GZDoom goes SVN!

Post by **Graf Zahl** » Tue Jan 29, 2008 22:05

Then you don't deserve better. RazTK's SVN builds are as good as Randy's or mine.

GuntherDW · Post by **GuntherDW** » Tue Jan 29, 2008 22:06

Lumpy wrote:I just hope Graf does put up offical releases sometime. One of the main reasons I haven't used normal ZDoom in a long ass time is because Randy hasn't put up an updated offical release since god knows when. And I'm not doing the SVN thing cause; 1. I can't compile anything 2. I do not feel like trusting somebody else besides the writer of the code to do the compiling.

if you don't want bleeding+cutting edge then that's fine

but if someone would "hand out" a false version or one containing a virus on boards like this his version would get deleted pretty quickly

i understand that you don't want to trust just about anyone, but why only trust the compiling to the author?
is it wrong of us for ex to create linux ports of a source port originally having linux support?

RazTK · Post by **RazTK** » Tue Jan 29, 2008 22:38

Lumpy wrote:2. I do not feel like trusting somebody else besides the writer of the code to do the compiling.

Believe me or not, my builds are compiled directly from the source without touching or doing ANY change to the code. Also, do you really think I'd go and set up a project on SourceForge just so I can have a place to upload infected files? Don't you think someone would have found something by now?

To put it more simply and in one word: WYSIWYG.

Post by **Enjay** » Tue Jan 29, 2008 22:49

Hey there Raz, I just downloaded r11, it seems to be working very nicely and I didn't get a virus either. What's up with that?

One thing I did notice that I am a little bit curious about: Whenever I DL a GZdoom SVN from sourceforge, IE babbles on about "this page contains secure and non secure items, do you want to show the non secure items" but it doesn't for your Zdoom downloads or any other SF page that I remember. It happens after you have clicked the GZD download and then SF takes you to the actual mirror page that you will be downloading from. Any ideas why that might be? I know it's nothing to worry about It just struck me as a bit odd that's all.

RazTK · Post by **RazTK** » Tue Jan 29, 2008 23:15

I actually get that thing on every page of SF, but I have absolutely no idea why. Google may help on figuring out what it means.

Edit: Try here:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/269348
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/910208

Post by **Enjay** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 0:38

Hmmm... a few pages say how to disable the message but it's global rather than site specific so I think I'll just leave it. It doesn't prevent me accessing the site. Strange that I only get it on the one SF site and you get it on them all.

RazTK · Post by **RazTK** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 2:07

Whoops. At first at thought that you refer to the message "To help protect your security, Internet Explorer has blocked this website from displaying content with security certificate errors" that IE's information bar shows (this is the message I get on almost every SF page). The error that you get has something to do with Google Ads AFAIK. Whenever Google Ads shows up I get that message.

YouTube · Post by **Nash** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 4:15

GuntherDW wrote:
Nash wrote:The way I see it, with the GZDoom SVN, people can immediately get a fixed EXE as soon as Graf says he's fixed a bug, instead of waiting for him to make an official release which is very unpredictable.
if he kept it closed source then yes, but SVN is primarily made to keep a history of the source, see it as a "version history", where you can get bleeding edge code delivered straight to your HDD
(that's it in a nutshell :p)

but it doesn't deliver EXE files, it can be used to do that, but it's not built for that :p

graf zahl could just as well put each and every (successfull) compile he makes online

all in all it's just a moral issue

Yeah yeah what I was trying to say is that I have scheduled tasks that update the source on my hard disk and compile so whenever I get back from work, if GZDoom's updated, I get to play immediately; but MOST IMPORTANTLY us users get to find bugs and report back ASAP. Back then without SVN, it was very frustrating when a fresh new official release had just been made and like 20 minutes later someone finds a bug, it gets flagged as fixed but the fixed EXE only comes out like months later...

(I might be exaggerating a bit there but you get the point)

Lumpy · Post by **Lumpy** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 20:18

Once again my brain fails me, and my thoughts were able to seep out into the public. Maybe trust was to strong a word to use. Hows about I change trust to rely. I did not mean to insinuate that RazTK would purposely infect anyone he could with a virus, or anything else that maybe unwanted. Nor do I think his skills are lacking.

I was simply expressing my feelings towards the matter. I guess SVN is like a hot-button for me, considering the last OFFICAL release of ZDoom is almost as old as my son. Since that release ZDoom users have either relied on SVN updates. Or are stuck using that last release, which is lacking alot of features compared to the SVN.

Now if you will all excuse me if this makes me seem simple minded, but when it comes to gaming I pretty much have a click-n-play attitude. Downloading a source, and then compiling said source seems more like a chore than fun. And looking through a forum, and/or wiki for a link to an already compiled version seems like it would be an equally sized chore.

Yes I know the link to his compilied version is in this thread. But what happens if he changes hosts, or if he passes the compiling torch to somebody else. If my life has taught me anything it has taught me this. The lesser people, places, and things involved in a process the better the odds are that that process will be completed correctly, or at all (case in point Legacy). So far in this thread we have established 10 - 12 different things that are involved in me getting a compiled version of GZDoom. And that's without getting anal about it, and adding in the ISPs, and physical server space. So yea you can see why I hope eventually a offical release is compiled by Graf, hosted, and posted here.

Don't get me wrong I believe an SVN is a great thing for various different reasons. I just hope that it doesn't become the status quo of releases. Randy seems to be using the ZDoom SVN for just that. He adds bug fix after bug fix after bug fix, and adds feature after feature after feature. He recently added one wacky feature that drastically slows the progress of GZDoom, and we still do not have an offical release of ZDoom. Hell I'm begining to wonder why he has a link to download version 2.1.7 of ZDoom on his download page at all. He might as well just get rid of it, and type out a short paragraph about how to download and compile your own SVN release. That way he will never have to update the ZDoom Download page at all anymore.

Post by **Enjay** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 20:25

The compiled versions are on sourceforge. That's the host for thousands of open source projects. Why not just bookmark the Zdoom and GZdoom project pages? The current versions, and all previous versions are listed there and easily available.

http://sourceforge.net/project/showfile ... _id=254169

https://sourceforge.net/project/showfil ... _id=254133

Post by **Graf Zahl** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 22:22

Some people can't be helped. Lumpy seems to be among them...

Post by **Rex Claussen** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 23:52

Graf Zahl wrote:Some people can't be helped. Lumpy seems to be among them...

Sadly, Graf, you appear to be misguided in your way of thinking. If the purpose of an SVN is to have an interim version that incorporates new features that are still subject to testing (or fixes known bugs), and is targeted primarily at a core group of developers, then the sentiment that you expressed makes sense. Otherwise, I am 100% behind Lumpy in his opinions. I don't have a problem with software developers creating SVN and making them available to interested people. However, so long as there is an "official" version of published software, the public should not be expected to seek out other versions, such as SVN. [Case in point - when the EDIV: Return from Oblivion demo was released, it was expected that players would use the latest publicly released version of ZDooM - v2.1.7. Why would the team have incorporated features that the general public would not benefit from (or worse, have a problem with) by using the most widely available version of ZDooM?]

I understand that mod developers want to use the latest version, which presumably incorporates features they have requested (or otherwise need). By all means let them get the SVN, compile it, and use the executable version (or get the compiled version if it is available). However, the general public (and I count myself among that group) are unlikely to (i) be following the progress and contents of successive versions, (ii) know where to find the SVN (without, as Lumpy pointed out, extensively searching for it), (iii) know what to do with an uncomplied SVN, or (iv) attempt the daunting task of actually compiling the code. [Case in point - the hoops that Enjay had to jump through to compile the GZDooM code. And Enjay is far more persistent in these matters than most.]

To sum up, SVN has its place in software development. But make no mistake that it is targeted to a very specific (and often small) group of users. For the broader public, the official version must be sufficient to support whatever add-on software (e.g., mods) is built upon its foundations. Having periodic updates of "official" releases is certainly desirable by the public, particularly if the new versions contain a sufficient number of improvements and bug-fixes. I believe that's all that Lumpy was saying.

Post by **Graf Zahl** » Thu Jan 31, 2008 0:04

And I will use it like that. But it should be obvious that a reasonable release schedule for ZDoom is a hopeless wish. It has been one year and 3 months now.

Post by **Rex Claussen** » Thu Jan 31, 2008 0:19

Graf Zahl wrote:And I will use it like that. But it should be obvious that a reasonable release schedule for ZDoom is a hopeless wish. It has been one year and 3 months now.

Fair enough.

I too wish that Randy would update the official version of ZDooM, not just because so many great mods are built on it (including mods that are waiting in the wings) but also because it holds up development on other software that is built upon it (like GZDooM).

For my part, I will limit my current project to the features available in GZDooM v1.0.32. But as my time horizon is several months, it's likely that I will get the opportunity to keep adding features as another official version of GZDooM is released (fingers crossed, here). [I realize that by using v1.0.32 I am limiting myself, and not making my work as innovative as it can be. However, in the interests of keeping my sanity I cannot afford to constantly seek out new ways to make my project stand out. Sad, but true.]

Post by **Graf Zahl** » Thu Jan 31, 2008 0:30

After 1.0.32 I have only been fixing bugs resulting from the renderstyle 'enhancement' plus a few minor things that are not really relevant so you won't miss out on much.