Regarding backwards compability TFS

[Tony32]

Adding backwards compability for lower client versions is impossible to do without HEAVILY modifying the source code. I wonder why you guys don't keep the support for older protocols instead of just removing it and make it work for the latest version all the time?

You could easily do that if you just made some simple checks and compile flags..

Like all the outfit changes, market, communication, encryption, protocol and all that stuff.
Instead of removing and updating, keep the support, make and if statement and let the compiler compile the things needed for said client version. Much like in Avesta for example. Compile with flag protocol_740 for 7.4 support, protocol_760 for 7.6 support, protocol_770 for 7.7 support.

It's very easy for you guys to do when you update the protocols and stuff. Please start doing this. It's not a bad idéa in any way except that the source files will be bigger.

Let me know what you think.

 

[53701688]

Definitly want this tfs 1.0 is stable and good but the lack off support for oldschool is a bit of a shame.

 

[wdvx]

It would be good, but nothing you cannot do yourself if you have time. The developers are most likely busy to actually update to next version, checking for changes, new bytes etc.
I could give it a shot but can't promise that I will succeed...

I guess if you strip down and change back all the newer bytes from 7.8 and > you will probably be able to login, then the rest is just removing / changing code by code. Or doesn't older clients support letters as account name?

 

[53701688]

Well, me and tony together tryed to convert latest tfs 1.0 to 7.72 but that wasnt a success.

 

[Ninja]

Well, me and tony together tryed to convert latest tfs 1.0 to 7.72 but that wasnt a success.

Might help you a little, https://github.com/EvulMastah/forgottenserver

 

[53701688]

we did exactly like he did but still when we login the server completly crashes i've managed to fix it to make my client debug but anything more..

 

[Black Reaper]

Just start from scratch.

 

[Tony32]

You guys who vote, especially no, can you explain why exactly you wouldn't want this?

 

[dominique120]

Because if the TFS 1.0 devs where to add 7.x support it would mean that they would need to do some HEAVY edits that will create all sorts of bugs and problems for TFS 1.0 and the users who keep up to date with it and the new protocols.

I'm voting NO on this one because TFS 1.0 does not need to be bogged down because a few people want to stay stuck in the past.

 

[Tony32]

Because if the TFS 1.0 devs where to add 7.x support it would mean that they would need to do some HEAVY edits that will create all sorts of bugs and problems for TFS 1.0 and the users who keep up to date with it and the new protocols.

I'm voting NO on this one because TFS 1.0 does not need to be bogged down because a few people want to stay stuck in the past.

If the server is stable and good now there wont be any difference if they keep it that way, just add some flags for other versions. No need to modify existing code, just make it compile those things needed for the target client version. And yes, it will need some work, but those who are good at it, can do it with ease for sure. Without breaking stuff.

And as I said, I believe those who are good at it, can make it fully backward compatible with older versions within one or two days.

 

[dominique120]

I still think TFS 1.0's master branch should be kept for the latest protocol only. You could always just have another 7.x branch without bloating the code of the master.

 

[Tony32]

12 people have voted, more votes folk. It doesn't take a lot of time to press 2 buttons.

 

[Obsdark]

It would be cool, increase the ammount of people who know actualy how to program in C++

With good tutorials i'm pretty sure than more people help with this or other kind of issue in the future.

Thanks a lot, i don't like the new ways of the server
Althoug i love if i can "combine" diferent characteristics of different versions,

For example, back then a 3 high parcel stack just one over the other was a wall, but i also love the mounts.

But if i must choose, i'll stick with the older versions.