• There is NO official Otland's Discord server and NO official Otland's server list. The Otland's Staff does not manage any Discord server or server list. Moderators or administrator of any Discord server or server lists have NO connection to the Otland's Staff. Do not get scammed!

OTClient 1.0

Unfortunately it will not be in official otclient git , they do not accept my changes and it is likely that you know why.

Wolf something posted about it on Discussion board, we all know the monopoly we've around but everyone pretends not to see it, aka: gray zone
 
Last edited:
Do you still wonder why the maintainer of otc, who is working in a project to rival otclient is not approving your changes?
XDDDDD
Can you explain who and what you mean with that?

Also, it's not getting approved yet, because probably nobody has reviewed it. That PR is a single clusterfuck with all kinds of changes in a single PR. If he actually wants it to be approved, he should split them up, because as it is currently, it's very cumbersome to actually review the code, especially since it's mixed with style change detections, as @Iryont has already mentioned here: Optimizations and Fixes by mehah · Pull Request #1093 · edubart/otclient (https://github.com/edubart/otclient/pull/1093#issuecomment-651187283)
 
the actual code is a complete mix of styles, it doesn't have a pattern. There are parts that edubart simply merged because no one was willing to do them in the past and it is completely off style (and lacking security checks too). To no 'approve' useful and tested changes of a fork because of style is the lowest level of lazyness I've seen in years working as dev. Being it 5 PRs or one, the amount of files changed is still the same...

Iryont was maintainer of otc until I pointed out he was closing relevant issues and everyone saw the hipocrisy of someone who has no real interest of see the project growing being the maintainer... common, he literally has a full working version of otc for years now.
This is the same for slavi, he's been working in the past years in his unity version, what kind of interest can we expect of someone who's building an alternative version for YEARS and pratically alone, to when he's finally getting closer to have a minimum viable product (mvp) someone decides to revive his old (and dead) rival.

@Mehah is not only reviewing his changes by himself, he's also testing them very closely and all changes are being reviewed by his peers and people who has interest in the project and evolution of otc.

The best we can expect now is to drop the old strings, with otc, with tfs and probably with otservlist/otland/remeres and so on...
 
Last edited:
What do we have left then? otservbr? Y I K E S
I'll risk my last warning before a ban by answering you but here it goes. Hopefuly the moderators will have mercy on this one.
Lately I'm not even trusting the community anymore, I'd much more prefer a small and focused group of really interested people working their best as hobby, either in a discord server or something rather than a forum full of people that only browser to either troll or cherry pick stuff. There's absolutely no good thing that can came up from people who are only interested in winning, no matter what.

Being one of the maintainers of otservbr global project and sharing all the improvements and fixes I did in the past years only to find out people are mocking us from behind and taking advantage by using our base and selling stuff on top of it or selling bug fixes is the worst sensation ever.
1593653596247.png
Every time I see something like this I only feel like giving up or just making closed source projects. I mean, common, the guy is literally running a server a making a payload out of it enought to pay 100$ for fixing a few pending issues that we still haven't had enough time to take a look and see and is only willing to pay in case it's "exclusive". Perhaps he'll even sell the fixes to another otadmins to get the money back...

It's a summ zero game, we are all stuck in prisioner's dilemma. More and more good and interested people will give up, the community will be about creating shity engines that will be seen as opportunities for more and more sales. Even the moderators of otland have gave up this toxic loop we are in and are now only following the flow:
1593653851834.png

How many years will we have to wait until another Saiyans, another Lucas, another Mehah... have a genuine interest of improving things?
I mean, can't we just take a look around and see that we all rely on the same projects? Can't we all just take a look at the otland sections and see that something somehow went wrong?

If you still don't get what I'm saying, just please play this game The Evolution of Trust (https://ncase.me/trust/)

That'll be the last time I talk about it, I'll use my time in a more productively way being the change I'm always mumbling about.
 
@Mehah I think you will be wasting time wanting to merge your work in the original otclient. Just keep doing the changes in your own repo and people there can keep testing your changes and see if theres any bug or anything else. If everything good then everything good.
 
Unfortunately it will not be in official otclient git , they do not accept my changes and it is likely that you know why.
Then push it to otlands fork:
 
Then push it to otlands fork:

I thought about it, but the code is different from the official, it will generate conflicts.
 
Why are you working on edubart repo? Isn't otclient fork better?

But it's a fork, I opened a PR to keep the official GIT updated.

Another thing, I would like to receive feedback from this project, if it was really optimized and etc ...
 
But it's a fork, I opened a PR to keep the official GIT updated.

Another thing, I would like to receive feedback from this project, if it was really optimized and etc ...
Im not using it atm but always test every update you do and i can say you are doing an amazing work reviving this again
 
Otland forked edubart's repo because it was dead for a good while, but then activity started again. Which honestly is awesome! And since we are in the same git network, it is fairly easy to merge (and resolve git conflicts) with each other. I imagine edubart's repo will be most strict, but I'm fine with that. That only means the quality of commits there are better and easier to merge into our forks.

I thought about it, but the code is different from the official, it will generate conflicts.

I did a merge from edubart to otland, it is currently a draft PR. I linked to appveyor builds in the comments:
If this gets through, it will be much easier to merge up changes in the future. (I wasn't good enough in git to do it before, which is why there are a good 100 commit difference between the repos).

Would be awesome if (somebody who actually use otclient) could test it and confirm that the merge is working properly. If this PR shows no issues, then we have successfully synced otland with edubart. After that, I might try to help out with merging and conflicts in PR's on the occasions I have time.

Although to be fair, the PR feedback you got is likely to be similar in the otland repo.
Each optimization should be in a separate branch, for a separate pull request.

Allowing us to test, review, improove and implement each optimisation properly.

Code indentation/code style changes should be merged as well, but should follow a guideline, and should be a completely isolated PR. (That changes no code, only fixes the style).

This is all to make it easier to review and test PR's. (Which is our biggest demand/issue atm). The open source OT development scene is flourishing right now, but we struggle to get enough PR reviewers and testers to keep up with the inflow.

I posted earlier in this thread about how to work with git, which can be used to help with this workflow. Git is hard, but awesome once your mind "clicks" on it. :)

Nice to see git done right - a proper fork!
But since your commits go straight into master, you should consider having another branch that represents upstream edubart/otclient master. Which shows where you are (in terms of being in sync with edubart) and has no changes.

So when you sync with another repo in the otclient network:
mehah/upstream -> merge edubart/master (fast forward)
mehah/master -> merge mehah/upstream (resolve potential git conflicts etc and keep your optimizations up to date with edubart)

You can also do cool stuff like
git checkout mehah/upstream (point your fork at "base")
git checkout -b single_optimization_update (take this base and make a new branch)
git cherry-pick <commit# single optimization update from mehah/master> (add selected updates to this branch)

git push mehah single_optimization_update (push this branch to github)

And send PR's by visiting edubart/otclient

Also some github tips, you can go into settings and enable issue tracker and wiki. So people can report bugs directly to your repo, write custom wiki guides etc.

Still, what a luxury problem to have. We have such amazing and active developers that we can't keep up with them. :) I encourage everyone who is capable to join our efforts in reviewing and/or testing pull requests!
 
Last edited:
does anyone have a clue how to fix this blinking creature issue?, also seem to have a problem with closing doors, it works fine on cip client
using version 7.72, tfs 1.2
 
Last edited:
Back
Top