The Newsletter Thread
#11
OK, I will include them in this month's newsletter.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#12
I think the newsletter should include news about the #2963 fix as well. One can summarize it along with #3097 in some sentence like this:

"When teleporting to other worlds or entering unloaded chunks, there is no longer a chance of falling through the void, ending up suffocating underground, teleporting back to the source world, or getting stuck in a teleportation loop."
Reply
Thanks given by:
#13
I can't think of anything too interesting that happened in April, I think we can skip that newsletter.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#14
My birthday wasn't interesting?Tongue just joking

Maybe we could delay it a little bit after we got 1.9 and tell about bsd builds (they are here right?)
Reply
Thanks given by:
#15
As me and @bearbin are responsable for writing the letter I though of something like: "Get excited! There are many new features in the queue to get merged such as: ........ 3115, ... etc !"
Reply
Thanks given by:
#16
I wouldn't rush to announce #3115. The changeset is huge and I have no idea how long it'll take to stabilize it. Currently the stability is not acceptable. Also, ideally Xoft should probably review it first.

As for #3151, it's a major change and it's technically ready but Tiger doesn't like it and I don't know how long it'll take to merge it if at all, so I wouldn't announce it yet either.

1.9 will probably be merged though, so the news could have "1.9 is coming soon".
Reply
Thanks given by:
#17
Okay, seems like we do have something to tell people about: We now officially support the 1.9 protocol.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#18
Yes. But to avoid disappointment, it should be made clear that we do not support 1.9 features yet, and we only support the protocol. It should also be made clear that 1.9 has some regressions and 1.8 is advised.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#19
SO we have like alpha support for 1.9
Reply
Thanks given by:
#20
(05-15-2016, 11:44 PM)SphinxC0re Wrote: SO we have like alpha support for 1.9

"Alpha" sounds too unstable. We support the protocol, but not the features, and we have minor regressions.
Reply
Thanks given by:




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)