[freeciv-data] Re: (PR#3597) german ruleset new version
Jason Dorje Short <[email protected]> Fri, 04 Apr 2003 13:29:41 -0500
| Newsgroups | gmane.games.freeciv.data |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Raimar Falke wrote: > On Fri, Apr 04, 2003 at 07:59:09PM +0300, Nikos Mavroyanopoulos wrote: > >>On Fri, Apr 04, 2003 at 04:25:22PM +0100, Daniel Herding wrote: >> >> >>>Hello, >>>This ruleset includes Wuppertal, Barmen and Elberfeld. >> >>Will new nations be included in freeciv? I've asked some time >>ago about including the Byzantine empire[0], >>but got no reply. Also the Ottoman empire is missing (more than 400 >>years of history). If new nations are to be included I could contribute >>some of them. > > > New nations can be included. Only the laziness of the maintainers are > the problem. It is isn't considered a high priority job. I have > started to add some nations in PR#3589 > (http://rt.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=3589) However it > received not much feedback. I wouldn't say they're a low priority - in principle, they're very simple to add. The problem is any two patches to add new nations will conflict with each other. A new nation requires: - A nation file, data/nations/xxx.ruleset. - A new tileset tag in data/misc/flags.spec - A new flag in data/misc/flags.png Which means you have to manually edit flags.png to add your new flag - and if another nation is added in the meantime you have to do this again. I would be in favor of splitting (or allowing the split of) the flags into different files. Problem is, with the current tileset setup this is infeasible - we'd need, for instance, data/flags/*.png and data/flags/*.spec, and every tileset (including add-ons) would have to list every flags/*.spec file for inclusion. ESR did some work to change this, but it was never completed. In addition to the above, there are a few pieces of code that need to be changed. For instance MAX_NUM_NATIONS==63 right now; changing this means a new capability. jason