=- James Quick wrote on Tue  3.Apr'07 at 13:23:10 +1000 -=

> On Mon, Apr 02, 2007 at 05:56:21PM +0200, Rado S wrote:
> > Uh ... "all of netrek" ... maybe I miss something or misunderstand
> > you, but aren't the respective client maintainers reponsible for
> > _their_ babies add newbie improvements?
> With all source in change control, with the languages in use
> being typical, and with active developers for each client (or
> server), they should be able to take patches from a single
> developer (you) implementing a feature that has common appeal.

Which would require 1 to go through the code of all other
clients rather than let client coders check their own code.
(how many are out there besides Paradise/TT, 5?)

> That's how I did it with the metaserver solicitation changes ...
> issuing patches for Vanilla, INL, and Paradise servers.

That was just 3 total and the one unfamilar to you was not
maintained at that time, there was nobody to ask for help.

> If you strike a barrier to your patch acceptance, then you have to
> work with all concerned developers until the problem is resolved.

Well, rather than to strike barriers, I offer this idea and
let the developers implement them as they like.
If they want this idea but not do it themselves, then they may ask
for it and get help.

© Rado S. -- You must provide YOUR effort for your goal!
EVERY effort counts: at least to show your attitude.
You're responsible for ALL you do: you get what you give.