MG should be ported to GAE! Not Merged!

[-Archmage-]

Come on Omega, just think of an unified fork, OK? That's all you need to think about to understand...
If this was a port project, obviously the two teams would not work together. That's part of the reason why this didn't happen months ago.
How? Read the snippet of the quoted IRC Chat

I am in full support of Omega's idea of porting from MG to GAE, GAE has a much older base and it's features are heavily rooted. It uses newer libraries to my knowledge, and as far as I know it has a better internal design(loads real fast, not to mention 7z/zip support with the addon folder!). I think porting MG features like multiplayer, irc chat, and those other things Omega mentioned, would be the fastest and safest way to go. I'm just wondering though.....what about the MG website?

If one's features were ported to another and the one ported to renamed, how would the end result be different from if they just mushed them together?

I probably could have been justified in deleting these posts due to their nature of unhelpful bickering, but I split them instead to be on the safe side.
-- ♥ John
And I gave a better title. -Ultifd

[ultifd]

Well, in the end it is the developer's choice what did they make? The one and only that both would agree upon, merging.

If one's features were ported to another and the one ported to renamed, how would the end result be different from if they just mushed them together?

It's different because then it would be GAE + multiplayer. That is not the plan, the plan is to include features of both forks, and to decide which ones to use if there are ones that are conflicting. Also, softcoder and titi wouldn't agree to that. Just like Silnarm doesn't just want to port all of GAE's feature to MG.

(Has anyone actually contacted the Glest team about replacing Glest?, rather than just posting on the forums? Every time I contact the team, they reply, even if it's to decline my request).

Well, I think we/someone can contact the team once this "Glest" merge project has finished. If things are really good, I think there will be a good chance.

If this was a port project, obviously the two teams would not work together.

Uh, why? Does how they're merged affect whether they work together or not?

x 100 I'm not going to even bother explaining, because it seems people won't even listen.   Of all people, since you have the most posts Arch, I thought you would have understand this before already.

I understand all of you guys think MG is just about multiplayer, and that's basically it. Well that's not really true, it was really harder than it seemed... You guys would understand if you played MG and GAE a lot. (I tested GAE a lot before MG, and now I guess I will again!   )

Of course, what I really just want the most is one unified project being worked on by the community. No more "my mods for engine X so you can't play if on your favorite engine Y" and no more splitting the developers (of an already small community) apart. In short, I just want us working on a project together in the spirit that free software was created in.

That's the plan, Omega! 

[-Archmage-]

Ultifd the simple fact is that to mush them would waste a lot of time. GAE has a lot more features so it makes perfect sense to take the features in MG that aren't already mirrored in GAE and put them in GAE then rename GAE to Glest 4.0. It's more efficient.

[ultifd]

It wouldn't waste a lot of time OK? You just don't understand... I guess you'll have wait until after the merge project is finished, to understand. Wow, I thought all of this type of talk would end with the announce of this project...
Well whatever, I might be disappointed at the community, but I'm not with the developers anymore! Thanks for your time on GAE/MG and your future time on this project, developers!

I just want to say to the devs though, just because YOU don't like something; does not mean it should never be in game. Glest should be an engine as flexible and feature-heavy as possible. Of course things may need compromise, but open-mindedness to anything will be extremely important

Omg...really?  If you guys really continue this type of way of thinking, we might as well just scrap this project!

[-Archmage-]

It wouldn't waste a lot of time OK? You just don't understand... I guess you'll have wait until after the merge project is finished, to understand. Wow, I thought all of this type of talk would end with the announce of this project...
Well whatever, I might be disappointed at the community, but I'm not with the developers anymore! Thanks for your time on GAE/MG and your future time on this project, developers!

I just want to say to the devs though, just because YOU don't like something; does not mean it should never be in game. Glest should be an engine as flexible and feature-heavy as possible. Of course things may need compromise, but open-mindedness to anything will be extremely important

Omg...really?  If you guys really continue this type of way of thinking, we might as well just scrap this project!

No offense Ultifd, but you're being idiotic and irrational here. We're saying to take the icing and put it on the cake, you're saying to take the icing and the cake and mush them together. Our way will probably end up a lot cleaner.

[ultifd]

Tell me why, when this was announced, that it was a merge and not a port? Tell me why, when people wanted to port MG to GAE or GAE to MG, it didn't happen? Have you not been in this community long enough to understand? And you're saying I'm idiotic and irrational...I might be angry, but I have my reasons.

Anyways lol, if you guys want a port, it obviously isn't going to happen. Do you really think softcoder and titi would agree to MG being ported over? 

[John.d.h]

No offense Ultifd, but you're being idiotic and irrational here.

Dude, have you completely forgotten how to conduct yourself on a public forum or what?  Knock it off.

[ultifd]

Verdict: Porting would generally be typically easier, but in the end it isn't the best for everybody. If the decision was to port MG to GAE or vice-versa, the whole idea would be scrapped.

[Psychedelic_hands]

Verdict: Porting would generally be typically easier, but in the end it isn't the best for everybody. If the decision was to port MG to GAE or vice-versa, the whole idea would be scrapped.

What even is the difference? I mean, because we'd be porting sooo much. Couldn't that just be considered a merge? 
I mean, just like adding the opposite ends of the engines together is a merge the way I see it. I just wish everyone could put names behind them and do what is "right".

[ultifd]

I guess it's hard to explain, if you were a developer or if you helped with the development; you would understand.
But I guess we should stop this "Semi-Flame War"...the decision was already made for it to be a merge, so...

[John.d.h]

What even is the difference? I mean, because we'd be porting sooo much. Couldn't that just be considered a merge? 
I mean, just like adding the opposite ends of the engines together is a merge the way I see it. I just wish everyone could put names behind them and do what is "right".

Considering nobody seems to know exactly how the merger is going to be done yet, it may very well end up using the lion's share of one engine or the other, but we mostly need to wait and see.  Frankly, anyone who hasn't spent the past several months knee-deep in Glest-related C++, is not really qualified to say whether it would be easier to "merge" or "port" (myself included) because we haven't actually seen how the code fits together, so let's let those who know what they're doing, do what they do.  The teams are finally starting to come together in a potentially awesome way, so let's not screw it up.

[Psychedelic_hands]

What even is the difference? I mean, because we'd be porting sooo much. Couldn't that just be considered a merge? 
I mean, just like adding the opposite ends of the engines together is a merge the way I see it. I just wish everyone could put names behind them and do what is "right".

Considering nobody seems to know exactly how the merger is going to be done yet, it may very well end up using the lion's share of one engine or the other, but we mostly need to wait and see.  Frankly, anyone who hasn't spent the past several months knee-deep in Glest-related C++, is not really qualified to say whether it would be easier to "merge" or "port" (myself included) because we haven't actually seen how the code fits together, so let's let those who know what they're doing, do what they do.  The teams are finally starting to come together in a potentially awesome way, so let's not screw it up.

Okay, I agree. Thank you John. 

[ElimiNator]

I have played GAE a bunch of times and I think its pretty buggy, so merging is the best bet. What what will it be called? Mega GAE?

[-Archmage-]

Sorry Ultifd.

@Elim: Glest. Elim, Glest!

[Zoythrus]

you guys say that you want to add the best parts of both forks but here's what im wondering: MG only has multiplayer and jpg support (even though jpgs suck), what else can MG add to the project?

[ultifd]

Considering nobody seems to know exactly how the merger is going to be done yet, it may very well end up using the lion's share of one engine or the other, but we mostly need to wait and see.  Frankly, anyone who hasn't spent the past several months knee-deep in Glest-related C++, is not really qualified to say whether it would be easier to "merge" or "port" (myself included) because we haven't actually seen how the code fits together, so let's let those who know what they're doing, do what they do.  The teams are finally starting to come together in a potentially awesome way, so let's not screw it up.

They chose to merge, and they will merge. Stop arguing about it.
Locked.

[Pizza90]

My 2 cents: Instead of taking  the best part of both the projects and merge them would not be better and faster to take the more stable project as base then port the other features from the other project?

[-Archmage-]

My 2 cents: Instead of taking  the best part of both the projects and merge them would not be better and faster to take the more stable project as base then port the other features from the other project?

That's been brought up, but apparently doing it that way isn't "merging", even though the end-product is the same.

[ultifd]

My 2 cents: Instead of taking  the best part of both the projects and merge them would not be better and faster to take the more stable project as base then port the other features from the other project?

That would probably be faster, but not better...if you guys really need to complain  about this, just help test the engines when you can. I still don't understand how 100% porting is a merge though, especially when neither sides of the teams didn't want a port of GAE or a port of MG...
Heh, it would be really different. But anyways, it'll be just as fast if people would help test   ...but it is the developers' decision, anyways.  

[Omega]

especially when neither sides of the teams didn't want a port of GAE or a port of MG...

I did do.

[ultifd]

Awesome, you're developing GAE?   

[-Archmage-]

Ultifd how do you make a pepperoni pizza from a cheese pizza?( ) Do you put the pepperonis on the pizza, do you put the pizza on the pepperonis, or do you put them in a blender.

[Zoythrus]

Ultifd how do you make a pepperoni pizza from a cheese pizza?( ) Do you put the pepperonis on the pizza, do you put the pizza on the pepperonis, or do you put them in a blender.

i think you should ask Pizza90 that one

[ultifd]

  We can't use an analogy in this situation...unfortunately Glest is nothing like a Pizza. I wish...
I think you'd understand if you tested both of the forks whether it's SVN or GIT, for at least months...  
What a coincidence...everyone who hasn't would rather have just a port.  

[-Archmage-]

We can't use an analogy in this situation...
I think you'd understand if you tested both of the forks, SVN and GIT, for at least months... 

Nice excuse.

It's simple logic man, GAE has more features, GAE has older roots. All I'm advocating is to use one as a code-base rather than levitate and play jenga.