[crossfire] GTKv2 trunk client to branches/1.x client (was Release 1.12)

[Mark Wedel]

Kevin Bulgrien wrote:
>>> - By January 20th I'd like to merge all trunk changes that are
>
> Why don't people get that you can build GTK-V1 with GTK2?  This is the only
> way the Windows client is built.  I don't think it should be dropped until
> jxclient is released.  If anything, change the default build to use GTK2.

  Just from a support/maintenance standpoint, I'd be in favor of getting rid of 
the gtk client.

  The main reason it has been around so long is because folks didn't really like 
the layout of the gtk2 client.  But with the different layout options, that is 
really all fixed - I can't really think of a compelling reason why the gtk1 
client should be retained any longer.


>> What we have in Trunk right now should become the current branches/1.x
>> client that all the Linux distros would then release through their
>> repository.
> 
> I wholeheartedly agree, but we need to be sure mwedel's changes are completed
> or we release prior to that change.  His check in comment said that server
> changes need to be made to avoid horking up the display.  Further, he changed
> only the GTK-V2 layout and not all the other layout files for the resizing
> thing he did.

  The other layouts should get updated - I didn't even think about that.

  With unmodifed layout files, things should work just as good as they did 
before.  Which is you won't be able to resize the map window, so those changes I 
made just won't get used.

  Testing with the other layouts would likely need to get done.  The reason the 
size for the map window was removed was that it acted as a minimum size (or so I 
seem to recall).  That said, without a size parameter, it may default to a not 
very useful layout.

  I already have the server changes - they are fairly trivial - I'm just not 
sure if they will have bad effects with other clients.  The change is basically 
that whenever the server gets a new map size, it clears all its cache and thus 
resends the entire map to the client.  What I'm not sure is if other clients 
actually will change the mapsize after play starts, and if clearing that data 
would give a result they don't want (it sort of has a bad side effect on the 
client in that it will also clear all fog of war information).

  My belief is that the resizing of the map window is really something a player 
will do to get the desired layout they want, and not something will be 
constantly playing with.

> 
> By the way, I'm also ok with thinning the number of offered layouts in a
> default install might be wise.  Perhaps we could pack up the others by
> adding a package for extra layouts.  If we do something like that, we
> probably need to try to test the water and see what people think about
> the various layouts, though I'd tend to package the layouts that work
> for lower screen resolutions with the client... which reminds me I still
> haven't checked in that 640x480 layout.

  My only issue with a bunch of different layouts is potential support issues - 
if one is rendered oddly and bugs are filed, if it is a standard layout, that 
sort of suggests it is something we should fix.

  I'm not sure if we could do some form of unsupported or contrib layouts - 
basically, we make these available, but use at your own risk and we don't offer 
any support for them.