[CF-Devel] Plea

[Mark Wedel]

 IMO, there is no reason that the server needs to support the alternate
set.  Not any more than it needs to support an iso set, a black and white
set, or anything more than that.

 That choice should be based purely on the client side.

 This may or may not follow the point in the past discussion about
seperation graphics from objects, but IMO, the images the server provides
should get moved towards 'use this if you don't have anything else to
display'.

 To follow from the previous discussions, that is one reason the server
supplies images at all - the client must have a sure way of getting images
it may be missing.  Having the server provide the images it is using
is the best way to do this.

 Current, the gtk/x11 (and probably gnome since I believed it borrowed
the same code) can be made to use a set of images in preferance to that
on the server.  Just make the ~/.crossfire/gfx directory, and put the alternate
images in there.

 This actually gives a much finer control than can ever be done on the
server, which can only really have different sets (alternate or primary).
But putting/removing images from that gfx directory, you can match
however you want (for example, if you like the primary version better,
just remove the corresponding files from the gfx directory, and it will
use whatever the server provides (presumably primary)) instead.

 To address some points below:

On Fri, 7 Sep 2001, dnh wrote:
>
     
      Admins don't know how to install the alternate set
     
     >
     
      Admins can't be bothered
     
     >
     
      Admins don't like it
     
     >
     
      Admins wouldn't mind supporting both but are preferenced towards standard
     
     >
     
      Admins don't use CVS (see the first point)
     
     >
     
      Admins have tried it, but got an overall response to change to standard
     
     >
     
      again.
     
     
 Probably a combination.  The usage of the alternate set is not very
well documented (the fact it is a seperate cvs distribution instead of
an alternate directory in the arch directory for example means people
just will not see it as much).

 I know that for me, its a mixed bag - I like some images in the altnerate
set over those in the primary set, but I dislike some in the alternate
set compared to that of the primary.

The fact that the primary is just that - the primary, means that it is the
one most often seen on web pages and what people are most used to.  Web
pages show the primary.  I have a feeling if a lot of things got switched
to the alternate, people will not be happy simply because it is not used
to what they are seeing.  And a few people might get really upset
when they get killed by some monster they do not recognize due to a new
face but in fact have fought and killed before - just didn't realize
they should take extra precautions because of they didn't know what it was.

>
     
      To anyone who wants to try it, the process goes like this..
     
     >
     
      download the cvs arch alternate_images
     
     >
     
      run the program filename_changer
     
     >
     
      create a link in crossfire/lib/ from alternate_images to
     
     >
     
      crossfire/lib/alternate_images
     
     >
     
      make collect
     
     >
     
      make install
     
     
 Much easier from the client perspective of:

 download the cvs alternate images.
 copy them into ~/.crossfire/gfx - may need to create directory first
 run your client.


IMO, the alternate set has had some bad effects - I've sometimes seen
a lot of focus on improving the altenrate set, and I think that sometimes
people are focusing on that more than looking at the same image in the
primary set and seeing if what they have now is better.

 I also have some problem of how many image sets should the server
actually support.  My personal opinion is one, and anything different
should be handled on the client side (the server only needs to provide
something if the client does not have it).  Otherwise, it seems to me
that the server could end up supporting a whole bunch of image types,
and at some level that would get pretty ridiculous.  For example, right
now it is pretty clear that the is the alternate image set and likely
to be an iso image set.  I could also see a small (24x24) image set, a
black and white image set, a ..., and that would get pretty crazy IMO

 Now what should get done is better docs on how to use these different
image sets with the client.  Certainly the gfx directory and how to
populate it with the files is not a well known fact.  I seem to recall
that the dx client has a similar ability.

 In short summary:  The selection of what images to use should really
be determined on the client, and not chosen on the server.