Villages and changes in 1.14

[12xx12]

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?

[bearbin]

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in that vein I don't think it's worthwhile to implement changes from a previous version, that have since been superceded.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.

[PureTryOut]

So far, the aim of Cuberite has been to replicate the features of the current version of Notchian Minecraft,

Sounds nice, but so far a lot of stuff from older versions haven't even been implemented. Why keep track of the current version of Notchian Minecraft while even older versions aren't feature complete yet?

See this list which keeps track of all missing features up to 1.12. Note that 1.12 came out the 7th of June 2017(!), that means even for a 4 year old version lots of stuff is missing. I really wonder why people care about newer versions when you can't fully play an older version yet ?

Luckily some people are working on implementing those missing features, but seeing how slow that is going in my personal opinion it's not of any use to implement anything from newer versions than 1.12 yet currently.

[tigerw]

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.

[Mathias]

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.

I agree. I attempted to implement new vanilla features and improve existing behavior for a while, but eventually had enough. It takes so much time and effort to replicate and test features, only to face a mountain of new functionality in the next version of Minecraft, developed by a large team of people with a full-time job. It's an endless cat-and-mouse game. While I still attempt to contribute to e.g. the Cuberite website and plugins when necessary, I started associating Minecraft with work, and no longer play the game as a result.

My opinion has always been to let people work on what they personally want to, instead of prioritizing features. We are all volunteers. If you want to see a specific feature, you'll likely have to spend the time learning the codebase and implementing it yourself.