When you do an update, can you increment the release number? There are now four releases that are all release 1. That gets a bit confusing if you've downloaded multiple versions and makes it difficult for bibliographers/historians when updating the current version in places like IFDB.
Yes, you're right! I saved a copy of the original-for-ParserComp ZIP. I should upload it and mark it as such, even though it has some obvious bugs I cringe at. And yes, it also causes a problem with save states between versions--I put in a topic at intfiction.org on how to get around that.
The middle 2 point-releases could be recreated, because I have source control. (If you have them, I'd be glad to add them.)
I took the IFComp path of just having the 1st release and the final one available, as I want to limit my fixes to the technical side, and also to something extremely unlikely to regress with proper testing.
I don't have the middle two releases (nor do I need them). I downloaded all the games at the beginning of the comp. Yours was release 1. Then I saw that there were a few updates from you blog entries, so I downloaded the latest and saw that it was still release 1. This could be confusing if, for example, IFDB said the latest version was release 1 and you've got release 1, so you think it's up-to-date, but it's actually got some bugs that have been fixed in a later release 1.
Good point ... yeah, release numbers fall into an odd gap for me. I like being able to have point releases, so I think of those as 1.0.1, 1.1, etc., which I round down to 1.
That's how it is in a full development environment, but it doesn't need to be the case here. There's a part of me that feels a 2.0 release for fixing a minor bug is overpromising, but I think it's good to differentiate the latest release from the initial release, and since Inform doesn't allow point-releases, I might as well make it release 2.
So it seems like a reasonable compromise for the future is to have release 2 be any in-comp changes since release 1, then release 3 be a quick turnaround for post-comp features with additional content.
It's a bug. The 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8 should be 8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1. I'll be uploading a new version soon, with this fixed. This was a last-minute feature added.
Also, you can type SCR to show only the piece locations to get around the bug for now, if you want.
← Return to game
Comments
Log in with itch.io to leave a comment.
When you do an update, can you increment the release number? There are now four releases that are all release 1. That gets a bit confusing if you've downloaded multiple versions and makes it difficult for bibliographers/historians when updating the current version in places like IFDB.
Yes, you're right! I saved a copy of the original-for-ParserComp ZIP. I should upload it and mark it as such, even though it has some obvious bugs I cringe at. And yes, it also causes a problem with save states between versions--I put in a topic at intfiction.org on how to get around that.
The middle 2 point-releases could be recreated, because I have source control. (If you have them, I'd be glad to add them.)
I took the IFComp path of just having the 1st release and the final one available, as I want to limit my fixes to the technical side, and also to something extremely unlikely to regress with proper testing.
I don't have the middle two releases (nor do I need them). I downloaded all the games at the beginning of the comp. Yours was release 1. Then I saw that there were a few updates from you blog entries, so I downloaded the latest and saw that it was still release 1. This could be confusing if, for example, IFDB said the latest version was release 1 and you've got release 1, so you think it's up-to-date, but it's actually got some bugs that have been fixed in a later release 1.
Good point ... yeah, release numbers fall into an odd gap for me. I like being able to have point releases, so I think of those as 1.0.1, 1.1, etc., which I round down to 1.
That's how it is in a full development environment, but it doesn't need to be the case here. There's a part of me that feels a 2.0 release for fixing a minor bug is overpromising, but I think it's good to differentiate the latest release from the initial release, and since Inform doesn't allow point-releases, I might as well make it release 2.
So it seems like a reasonable compromise for the future is to have release 2 be any in-comp changes since release 1, then release 3 be a quick turnaround for post-comp features with additional content.
Is this a bug? My pawn is at c3(as the board shows) but the parser seems to think it's on c6, same with the king.
It's a bug. The 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8 should be 8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1. I'll be uploading a new version soon, with this fixed. This was a last-minute feature added.
Also, you can type SCR to show only the piece locations to get around the bug for now, if you want.
Fixed. Sorry about that--it's a bit embarrassing this slipped through! The new version is uploaded now.