[Scummvm-devel] Re: [Scummvm-cvs-logs] SF.net SVN: scummvm: [22599] web/trunk/compatibility.php

[Max Horn]

Am 24.05.2006 um 12:43 schrieb Eugene Sandulenko:

> On Wed, 24 May 2006 01:16:11 -0700
> fingolfin at users.sourceforge.net wrote:
>
>> Revision: 22599
>> Author:   fingolfin
>> Date:     2006-05-24 01:16:07 -0700 (Wed, 24 May 2006)
>> ViewCVS:  http://svn.sourceforge.net/scummvm/?rev=22599&view=rev
>>
>> Log Message:
>> -----------
>> Added Future Wars and Operation Stealth to the compatibility list
>> (TODO: Insert proper compat ratings)
> I didn't want to do it, neither advertise it on NEWS until some major
> issues are resolved, autodetection among them.
>
> Adding a game to our compatibility list means that we accept  
> bugreports
> for it, and we're not yet ready for that :/

Ah well, we don't have to accept bug reports for that, after all,  
*we* set the rules :-). But nevertheless, you are right, so far we  
handled things that way. I'll remove fw & os again, sorry!


Am 24.05.2006 um 15:34 schrieb Torbjörn Andersson:
> Speaking of Future Wars and Operation Stealth, should we change their
> target names to something more descriptive than "fw" and "os" to avoid
> future conflicts?

I wouldn't mind that. Are there any techincal reasons for using fw  
and os ? And what would the alternatives be? It would seem futurewars  
and operationsstealth are a bit too verbose, aren't they? Maybe  
"future" and "stealth" or "operation"? :-)


Cheers,
Max