|
Title: What does UQM 1.0.0 look like to you? Post by: chapel on March 30, 2018, 09:03:42 pm So, I've always wondered... what is the path to 1.0.0 for UQM?
I see we're slowly getting closer. Just wondering what you guys think 1.0.0 "IS" Title: Re: What does UQM 1.0.0 look like to you? Post by: Krulle on March 30, 2018, 10:55:20 pm Just before 0.6 got released (or was it .5?), I've read somewhere, that they want to move the actual story from hardcoded out into configurable files.
Just before 0.7, they wrote that this is harder than expected, as so much stuff is hardcoded, that that might lead to a complete new programming... Hence, they're pushing 0.7, because they accumulated so many bugfixes that waiting much longer is irresponsible. I think that as Open Source, we have a fantastic result here, and while I may wish for the lead teams dream to become true, I fear the effort necessary will simply make it impossible. Hence a 0.9 will sometime be a version that makes UQM playable on 2060's PCs, and that may be "it", as Stardocks engine may have taken over all UQM storyline in user-created mods.... We'll see... Title: Re: What does UQM 1.0.0 look like to you? Post by: JHGuitarFreak on March 31, 2018, 02:27:28 am Just before 0.6 got released (or was it .5?), I've read somewhere, that they want to move the actual story from hardcoded out into configurable files. Just before 0.7, they wrote that this is harder than expected, as so much stuff is hardcoded, that that might lead to a complete new programming... Hence, they're pushing 0.7, because they accumulated so many bugfixes that waiting much longer is irresponsible. I think that as Open Source, we have a fantastic result here, and while I may wish for the lead teams dream to become true, I fear the effort necessary will simply make it impossible. Hence a 0.9 will sometime be a version that makes UQM playable on 2060's PCs, and that may be "it", as Stardocks engine may have taken over all UQM storyline in user-created mods.... We'll see... They were actually quite along the way before development halted in 2015. Starting to integrate Lua for the game states and communication logic. I don't really know how much is usable but it is in there. More likely 0.8.0 will be the one to be made to work on future machines. I don't even know where to begin on making it compatible for 64bit. Somebody is going to have to work it out after the successor to macOS High Sierra hits the market later this year. Since Apple is dropping all support for 32bit programs. Title: Re: What does UQM 1.0.0 look like to you? Post by: firemanben on April 14, 2018, 11:50:51 am "Since Apple is dropping all support for 32bit programs. " Is this common knowledge?
Title: Re: What does UQM 1.0.0 look like to you? Post by: Krulle on April 14, 2018, 07:14:57 pm https://support.apple.com/en-uk/HT208436 (https://support.apple.com/en-uk/HT208436)
High Sierra will be the last macOS supporting 32 bit programs.... Title: Re: What does UQM 1.0.0 look like to you? Post by: CelticMinstrel on April 15, 2018, 01:46:54 am Well that's slightly disappointing, as it would presumably mean that, once I finally get a new Mac, I can no longer use some programs, such as Finale (unless I do it on the new Mac)... not that it would necessarily work even on High Sierra, mind you.
I mean, I was going to be keeping my old Mac around anyway for a few old PPC games, but it's still a bit annoying. Title: Re: What does UQM 1.0.0 look like to you? Post by: JHGuitarFreak on April 15, 2018, 02:26:41 am Well that's slightly disappointing, as it would presumably mean that, once I finally get a new Mac, I can no longer use some programs, such as Finale (unless I do it on the new Mac)... not that it would necessarily work even on High Sierra, mind you. I mean, I was going to be keeping my old Mac around anyway for a few old PPC games, but it's still a bit annoying. Just keep High Sierra around and dual-boot. The macOS is the best I've dealt with in terms of partitioning and dual booting. Title: Re: What does UQM 1.0.0 look like to you? Post by: CelticMinstrel on April 16, 2018, 12:01:18 am I'm already in that situation with a dual-boot between Snow Leopard and Lion. It basically doesn't work; there is nearly zero incentive to put everything on hold just to reboot to the older operating system. Sure, I can do it; but I don't do it, so what's the point? Much cleaner to actually have separate computers, as then I can switch between them with a press of a button, without dropping everything.
|