List of most important bugs

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.adom (More info?)

Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 01:13:34 -0700, Twinge wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>>If we can indeed convince him that this will work, we'd probably want to
>>either ask him to send us the data in the database, or, if that's not
>>possible/plausible, someone could program a bot to extra all the bug
>>database info and put it all together in one file (Shouldn't be too
>>hard).
>
> I started working on such a program about an year ago - search for a
> similar thread where we wanted to ask Thomas to help with the bug
> database, and ended up discussing the superiority of archivers. (IIRC,
> Thomas never replied to the e-mail).

I referenced that thread a couple of times in this thread already.
It is very worthwhile reading for the current discussion, so anybody who
hasn't been here back then and wants to contribute to the discussion, do
please read up on it.

Malte

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.adom (More info?)

Twinge <homelesspete@gmail.com> wrote:

> This includes iron ore, rings of the fish, helms of water-breathing, and
> probably more.

I think you mentioned it once, but since I forgot about it, I'm quite
thankful for the reminder. 😀
I added it as an extremely minor one.

--
Nasrudin walked into a teahouse and declaimed, "The moon is more useful
than the sun." "Why?", he was asked. "Because at night we need the light
more."

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.adom (More info?)

Twinge wrote:
> The Wanderer wrote:
>
>> The issue with snipping is one of leaving more than is necessary vs. not
>> leaving enough to make sense. In this particular case, I don't like to
>> see things of the pattern
[...]
>> and while I acknowledge that sometimes there can be justification for
>> quoting like that (I've done it myself at times), I feel that it
>> requires much more than just "it was still fairly relevant". YMMV.
>
> I guess I just don't have any problem with scrolling 10 extra lines to
> get to the new stuff, personally 😉 I don't think I've been
> particularily bad about snipping so I won't worry about it too much,
> but I'll try to avoid stuff like your example if possible.

I was considering commenting on the snipping too, so now that the topic
has come up anyway, I say that I agree with The Wanderer. Whether or not
you mind scrolling past those lines isn't the issue, since *you* are the
only person who does *not* have to read through your postings. ;-)

It's not really about having to scroll past the stuff, it's about having
to read it. Only leave in what you would expect other people to actually
read to get the necessary context. More than a few paragraphs of
quoting are very, very rarely required.

>>> Well yeah, but for one I've never seen an older bug report that
>>> still aplied to 1.1.1 (though I haven't explcitly looked), and for
>>> two they should all have been re-reported if they were still bugs.
>>
>> ...? I wouldn't have thought so; in fact, I'd have thought that they
>> should explicitly have *not* been re-reported, instead of people
>> simply commenting on existing bug reports.
>>
>> For that matter, even assuming that the principle you present holds,
>> they would not have been re-reported if they had not been encountered
>> again... and I think it's possible (albeit not necessarily likely)
>> that some bugs could be rare enough to be encountered only once in a
>> blue moon, enough to have been seen and reported once but not enough
>> to have come up since the new version even though they still exist.
>
> I'm not saying that bugs SHOULD be re-reported constantly for every new
> version, I'm just saying they probably WOULD be seeing as how people
> still report skilled all the time 😛

The people who have reported the skilled bug couldn't see each other's
updates, since they were all added at the same time.

The bug report process asks you very clearly to search the database
before reporting anything, so most sensible people (those who provide
the good bug reports) would *not* re-raise an issue that has already
been reported for an older version. That's the way it works in all
open-source projects I know that use public bug tracking. In the Mozilla
bug database, you'll find plenty of still relevant bugs from versions
like 0.9.x which will probably celebrate their tenth birthday before
getting fixed.

> And we could also try an 'actions speak louder than words' approach, and
> start working on making a master bug list even if we don't get a reply
> from him, hehe. Maybe start on it anyway, and kick it into high gear if
> we DO get a response.

I'd advise against that. There have been enough attempts to wrestle
control over ADOM away from Thomas already. If he doesn't like it, don't
do it. If we don't know whether or not he likes it, we should find out
the polite way.

Malte

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.adom (More info?)

The redraft of the bug list (for use in the adom wiki):
01)Bugs causing the game to freeze
nothing yet
02)Bugs causing the game to crash unrecoverably
Skilled, Ingots, ...
03)Severe game balancing problems
Uberjackal
04)Buggy formulas commonly noticed
Monster kill themselves, you fall when entering the rift, Artifact
generation, ..
05)Buggy formulas scarcely noticed
Increasing stats, Unicorn, ...
06)Wraping bugs
Peity, Cat Lord, Molochs, ...
07)Illogicalness concernig actions
Repeatedly falling in pit, Ventriloquism while muted, ...
08)Illogicalness concerning items/monsters
Rustproof items created rusty, swamp hydras causing sickness too seldom,
....
09)Various illogicalness
Game Of Life and Holy Water, Exp from door traps, ...
10)Couldn't think of a title
Mention typos like 'polemarms' and wrong information in the manual
(skilled does twice, corruption after 180d)

There should be another list for the exploits, since some of them are no
real bugs (gremlin scumming), the ones that are bugs should be linked to.

Note this is just a draft. I'm not happy with number nine it's too
imprecise, but I couldn't think of anything else. I also don't like the
word illogicalness, but again ... . (I'm a bit tired)


I updated the old list (DV bonus and fire resistance).
--
rgra bug list: http://adombugs.100free.com/

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.adom (More info?)

xhoch3 wrote:

> The redraft of the bug list (for use in the adom wiki):

Don't call it "the ADOM wiki". There is already an ADOM wiki which is
called "ADOM wiki". The new one should be called something else. As far
as I can tell its official name is "SpoilyWiki".

Besides, I wouldn't advocate putting it on that wiki at this point in
time. In fact, I wouldn't advocate putting it on that wiki at all. The
reasons for this will become apparent once I've posted the summary of
Thomas' reply to our "official" inquiries, which I plan to post tomorrow.

To keep you informed, Thomas has addressed all questions on Thursday and
I've written a summary on Friday. I have not yet publicly posted the
summary since I wanted to give Thomas some time for reading through it
and checking if I represented his positions correctly. I intend to post
it tomorrow evening.

Malte

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.adom (More info?)

Malte Helmert wrote:

>
> To keep you informed, Thomas has addressed all questions on Thursday and
> I've written a summary on Friday. I have not yet publicly posted the
> summary since I wanted to give Thomas some time for reading through it
> and checking if I represented his positions correctly. I intend to post
> it tomorrow evening.
>

Thanks in advance for the summary and thank you very much for mailing to
Thomas. Now I'm really sitting on hot coals. You know I have no patience!
I just hope you mean tomorrow evening japanese time ...

--
rgra bug list: http://adombugs.100free.com/