Forge Version 1.5.39 (And Beyond)

[KrazyTheFox]

Sigh, got a build error when I tried to do the 1.5.40 release:

My apologies. The actual username to use for Maven is just "cardforgereleases". My settings.xml is the following:

Code: Select all

<settings>
   <servers>
       <server>
           <id>cardforge-repo</id>
           <username>cardforgereleases</username>
           <password>--redacted--</password>
       </server>
       <server>
           <id>cardforge-snapshot-repo</id>
           <username>cardforgereleases</username>
           <password>--redacted--</password>
       </server>
   </servers>
</settings>


Since it's been tagged and the version numbers updated, you should be able to check out the tagged version and run:

Code: Select all

mvn -U -B -P windows-linux,osx clean install deploy -Dusername=subversion_username -Dpassword=subversion_password

There also might be a checkout folder (or similar) in your forge/forge-gui-desktop/target folder that contains a checked out copy of the code. If you invoke Maven from that folder, you should be able to skip the checking out part.

[Chris H.]

Turns out that I need to delete the password/username combo as this data is passed to sm via the Mac OS X Keychain Access.app.

I tried your suggestion and it deployed a 1.5.41 snapshot instead.

I will try a beta 1.5.41 build and release instead.

[Chris H.]

Turns out that I need to delete the password/username combo as this data is passed to sm via the Mac OS X Keychain Access.app.

I tried your suggestion and it deployed a 1.5.41 snapshot instead.

I will try a beta 1.5.41 build and release instead.

 
Looks like it may have worked out OK.

[KrazyTheFox]

Turns out that I need to delete the password/username combo as this data is passed to sm via the Mac OS X Keychain Access.app.

I tried your suggestion and it deployed a 1.5.41 snapshot instead.

I will try a beta 1.5.41 build and release instead.

 
Looks like it may have worked out OK.

Looks good over here! Downloaded and running with the correct 1.5.40 version number.

[drdev]

So it appears nobody can access the Forge Android alpha anymore. Can we get a new publish of 1.5.41.001 somewhere as soon as possible?

[Rob Cashwalker]

drdev,

KrazyTheFox should have control of cardforge.org now.

[KrazyTheFox]

drdev,

KrazyTheFox should have control of cardforge.org now.

I do, thanks!

Since I've got both .org and .link, does anyone have a preference as to what we should do with .org? Ideally I'd like to pay for just one of them and I'm guessing .link will not be it. For now I'll redirect .org to .link.

[friarsol]

Can we get a .41 release on the docket for the end of this coming week? I'm sure everyone would love to play with Origins cards.

[drdev]

Is Origins ready to go if I released an Android Alpha update?

[friarsol]

Is Origins ready to go if I released an Android Alpha update?

I'm sure there's a few card bugs still floating around (Kytheon and Infernal Scarring), but that shouldn't be enough to stop an Android update.

[LordHelmchen]

As there has been talk about (lack of) use of a bugtracker here, it might be an appropriate place for this thoughts:

I've always wondered why Forge doesn't use the slightlymagic.net bugtracker, seeing as the official Forge forum is already here. I would hazard the guess that not having to login to and know about a seperate site would already increase the willingness of the average end user to report bugs in the tracker.
Mentioning the tracker in the "How to Provide a Useful Bug Report" sticky would not hurt. The current state (intentionally?) actively discourages from reporting through a tracker. (I also feel like there are too many stickies. The more there are, the less the really important topics stand out.)

[friarsol]

As there has been talk about (lack of) use of a bugtracker here, it might be an appropriate place for this thoughts:

I've always wondered why Forge doesn't use the slightlymagic.net bugtracker, seeing as the official Forge forum is already here. I would hazard the guess that not having to login to and know about a seperate site would already increase the willingness of the average end user to report bugs in the tracker.
Mentioning the tracker in the "How to Provide a Useful Bug Report" sticky would not hurt. The current state (intentionally?) actively discourages from reporting through a tracker. (I also feel like there are too many stickies. The more there are, the less the really important topics stand out.)

Actually, we used to direct users to the bug tracker and it caused more problems than it resolved. People would do similar things they do now (post bugs for old versions, not provide enough information, and not follow up on tickets) which basically just littered our bug tracker with a bunch of created tickets that were either already resolved or unresolvable. In addition to that, we started getting lots of people complaining about this system since they didn't understand what they were supposed to be doing, which is why we went away from that line of reporting. So I don't necessarily agree that it wouldn't hurt. If all of our users were fully educated on how bug trackers worked, then I would be more amenable to it. With a limited amount of time I can work on Forge, if half of that time is reserved for chasing down tickets, and trying to keep the bug tracker in a useful state, it makes me less likely to actually be able to improve things.

I think it most likely comes down to a culture thing. If there was enough momentum by all of the developers to actively post bugs and fix bugs through the tracker it would work well (in fact, when we used to be on google code we used one pretty regularly). I don't know anything about the bug tracker on slightlymagic, nor or accessibility to it. Obviously, there isn't a project setup for us on there, and I'm not particularly sure where we would get that from.

There probably are too many stickies, a lot of them should probably just be linked directly from FAQ, since a lot of the things that are stickied are either expired (like some of these Quests) or so narrow that living in the FAQ makes more sense than locking to the top of the page. While I do have approval rights for the Forge group, I somehow don't actually have moderation rights in our forum, so I can't really do anything about that..