Re: Foil rarity fix patch (completed)
Posted: 19 Jul 2017, 16:10
Ah, well, I'm sorry if my phrasing was somewhat awkward, what I meant to say when I said "knowingly" was just that you mentioned that some of your work may not work well or at all for the newer sets but you sounded like you hoped to get the code integrated immediately despite that (in the original submission, anyway - a lot has changed since then and the submission transformed after all the hard work you put into updating it and I put into formatting and tweaking it to get it approved and integrated upstream). So, all I meant to imply was that if the code is expected to be merged with Forge, it would have to be made to work with all the sets first, that is also what I'm referring to as the "project vision" - Forge is coded in such a way that it tries to support all the sets and all the cards it can, from the beginning of history of Magic (LEA) and till this very day. It's an ambitious goal and not an easy one to follow, but that's what makes Forge.... Forge, I don't know. One of the things, anyway.
Yes, several "return to such-and-such plane" sets have been printed in the new era. For example, there was "Innistrad" first (ISD), and then there was "Shadows over Innistrad" (SOI). WotC likes to return to many of its older planes, and I guess sometimes they can't come up with anything more unique than "Shadows over X" or "Battle for X".
Historically we consider the bugs that break the game (make it crash, make an entire card mechanic not work, make booster generation for multiple sets fail to work in an expected way or crash, etc.) the most severe, and we always try to prioritize fixing those (as long as there's a dev with enough spare time and knowledge to take care of it, which, sadly, is also not always immediately possible). New features are added once they are fleshed out enough to work well and not get in the way of existing features or crash/break the game. Non-critical issues are taken care of as the time permits for the devs that are currently available (sadly, most of us / all of us have real life jobs too, which tend to prevent us from working on Forge as much as many of us would probably want to do otherwise).
Btw, as a significant change that we'll be going through this weekend, we're going to be migrating from SVN to Git, which means that you'll be able to start contributing patches to it immediately, but you'll have to do it in separate branches (in fact, ALL of us will be doing it in separate branches, which will then go through the review/approval procedure and get mainlined into the "master" branch once fleshed out and ready for integration, not breaking anything). This should simplify the submission, review and approval procedure, as well as get rid of the "patch" system which I know you dislike very much (you'll submit your changes in the form of a code branch, which is a live copy of the repository as opposed to the static "patch" which is nothing more than a text file).
However, my original point still stands: please do consider taking some time to improve your coding/formatting style. I might sound a bit paranoid about it (though I'm really not), but just trust me on this one - improving your coding style will go a long way towards simplifying the integration procedure for your code since it'll be a lot easier to read, understand, and modify, it'll also reduce the necessity for us to take care of it for you (and untangle your code) as opposed to actually looking for issues and helping you isolate and resolve them.
- Agetian
Yes, several "return to such-and-such plane" sets have been printed in the new era. For example, there was "Innistrad" first (ISD), and then there was "Shadows over Innistrad" (SOI). WotC likes to return to many of its older planes, and I guess sometimes they can't come up with anything more unique than "Shadows over X" or "Battle for X".
Historically we consider the bugs that break the game (make it crash, make an entire card mechanic not work, make booster generation for multiple sets fail to work in an expected way or crash, etc.) the most severe, and we always try to prioritize fixing those (as long as there's a dev with enough spare time and knowledge to take care of it, which, sadly, is also not always immediately possible). New features are added once they are fleshed out enough to work well and not get in the way of existing features or crash/break the game. Non-critical issues are taken care of as the time permits for the devs that are currently available (sadly, most of us / all of us have real life jobs too, which tend to prevent us from working on Forge as much as many of us would probably want to do otherwise).
Btw, as a significant change that we'll be going through this weekend, we're going to be migrating from SVN to Git, which means that you'll be able to start contributing patches to it immediately, but you'll have to do it in separate branches (in fact, ALL of us will be doing it in separate branches, which will then go through the review/approval procedure and get mainlined into the "master" branch once fleshed out and ready for integration, not breaking anything). This should simplify the submission, review and approval procedure, as well as get rid of the "patch" system which I know you dislike very much (you'll submit your changes in the form of a code branch, which is a live copy of the repository as opposed to the static "patch" which is nothing more than a text file).
However, my original point still stands: please do consider taking some time to improve your coding/formatting style. I might sound a bit paranoid about it (though I'm really not), but just trust me on this one - improving your coding style will go a long way towards simplifying the integration procedure for your code since it'll be a lot easier to read, understand, and modify, it'll also reduce the necessity for us to take care of it for you (and untangle your code) as opposed to actually looking for issues and helping you isolate and resolve them.
- Agetian