Posts: 69
Threads: 10
Joined: Aug 2020
Thanks: 1
Given 7 thank(s) in 7 post(s)
Villages and Villagers were changed massively in 1.14.
Do you think it's worth taking care of the "old" behaviour like zombie sieges? Or skipping directly to the new behaviour?
Posts: 1,469
Threads: 57
Joined: Jul 2012
Thanks: 66
Given 126 thank(s) in 107 post(s)
So far, the aim of Cuberite has been to replicate the features of the current version of Notchian Minecraft, in that vein I don't think it's worthwhile to implement changes from a previous version, that have since been superceded.
If somebody wanted the old behaviour for some reason, then they should be able to write a plugin to implement that functionality, or make some changes to the core server. But the focus of development effort should be on current features, in my eyes.
Posts: 952
Threads: 16
Joined: May 2013
Thanks: 66
Given 105 thank(s) in 89 post(s)
For me, implementing a specification isn't overly exciting, the specification being the MC wiki; bearbin once bemusedly noted that most of the core contributors don't actually play the game, and for me I'm certainly more interested in the "server" part of Minecraft server. I'm currently working on refactoring and it's nice seeing "ugly" code or a "bad" design get straightened out. But these changes won't improve the end-user experience or bring anything new.
Afterwards I hope to add protocol support for new versions. I'm reasoning that players largely upgrade to newer versions and switching versions using the launcher is friction, so being able to connect takes close to top spot on the priority list.
I personally lack the motivation and discipline to start from the beginning and make sure everything is implemented, and in the case of the world generator, the knowhow too. However other contributors are adding new features as you say, but it'll be slow going.