0.4.10 release

Discussion about the project in general, organization, website, or any other details that aren't directly about the game.
Message
Author
User avatar
Vezzra
Release Manager, Design
Posts: 5295
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 12:56 pm
Location: Sol III

Re: 0.4.10 release

#16 Post by Vezzra » Fri May 01, 2020 1:15 pm

Geoff the Medio wrote:
Sun Apr 26, 2020 2:17 pm
There have been numerous bugs reported in the last few days on the forums, which haven't been copied to github, so I think we need to wait for those to be sorted out as well...
It would be very helpful if proper issues were opened on github for those. Given my time constraints it's difficult for me to keep track of both what's going on on github and bug reports scattered on the forum.

So, if there are still reports of bugs on the forum which need to be addressed for 0.4.10, if anyone can open corresponding issues on github, please do.

Meanwhile I'm going to postpone the creation of the release branch as suggested, until this is sorted out.

User avatar
adrian_broher
Programmer
Posts: 1154
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2013 9:52 am
Location: Germany

Re: 0.4.10 release

#17 Post by adrian_broher » Fri May 01, 2020 1:34 pm

> Meanwhile I'm going to postpone the creation of the release branch as suggested, until this is sorted out.

Why? The reporter made clear that he doesn't want to stick to the report process. I don't see a reason why the release should be put on hold down because of someones special needs.
Resident code gremlin
Attached patches are released under GPL 2.0 or later.
Git author: Marcel Metz

User avatar
Vezzra
Release Manager, Design
Posts: 5295
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 12:56 pm
Location: Sol III

Re: 0.4.10 release

#18 Post by Vezzra » Fri May 01, 2020 1:59 pm

adrian_broher wrote:
Fri May 01, 2020 1:34 pm
Why? The reporter made clear that he doesn't want to stick to the report process. I don't see a reason why the release should be put on hold down because of someones special needs.
I didn't/don't know which bug reports Geoff was/is referring to in his above post, to me it sounded as if there were several that should be addressed for the release. I didn't bother to check why those bug reports ended up only on the forum, and not on the github issue tracker. That has happened before for different reasons.

Anyway, I don't care who opens the corresponding issues on github for those bugs which are considered serious enough. If the original reporter doesn't want to do it (far whatever reason), someone else can do it.

The case you linked to doesn't look that serious to me. If no one opens a bug report on github for it, then, as you said yourself in that thread, too bad, it's likely to be forgotten. And I certainly won't hold up the release process for that. But, as I said, I got the impression that there are other, sufficiently serious bug reports, and I want to wait for those to get resolved.

And I'm not waiting forever for bug reports to get added to the github tracker. I'll give it maybe another week, what hasn't been added as an issue by then (aside from brand new bug reports on the forum which should also get a fair chance), well, again, too bad. I really don't want to keep track of bug reports scattered around various locations. That defeats the purpose of having an issue tracker.

I guess we should enact a suggestion you made some time ago, to close down the possibility to report bugs here on the forum...

User avatar
Geoff the Medio
Programming, Design, Admin
Posts: 12676
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 1:33 am
Location: Munich

Re: 0.4.10 release

#19 Post by Geoff the Medio » Wed May 13, 2020 8:20 am

Vezzra wrote:
Fri May 01, 2020 1:59 pm
I guess we should enact a suggestion you made some time ago, to close down the possibility to report bugs here on the forum...
That's not really feasible is it? Other than deleting any bug report posts or just ignoring them...

User avatar
Vezzra
Release Manager, Design
Posts: 5295
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 12:56 pm
Location: Sol III

Re: 0.4.10 release

#20 Post by Vezzra » Wed May 13, 2020 6:15 pm

Geoff the Medio wrote:
Wed May 13, 2020 8:20 am
That's not really feasible is it? Other than deleting any bug report posts or just ignoring them...
Well, while you can't technically prevent it, we can at least not provide a place dedicated to bug reports. Basically adjust the description of the "Support" forum to tell more clearly that while questions/discussions before submitting a bug report can and shall take place there, the actual bug report needs to be made on the github issue tracker might help.

Bug reports that are still posted on the forums should always be redirected to the github issue tracker, instead of starting a discussion here.

That at least would be my suggestion how to handle this.

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 2712
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: 0.4.10 release

#21 Post by Oberlus » Wed May 13, 2020 6:32 pm

Vezzra wrote:
Wed May 13, 2020 6:15 pm
we can at least not provide a place dedicated to bug reports. Basically adjust the description of the "Support" forum to tell more clearly that while questions/discussions before submitting a bug report can and shall take place there, the actual bug report needs to be made on the github issue tracker might help.
Agree. Many often players willing to report the bug where it is more helpful just don't know that the issue tracker is the place to go, but react kindly and do it when asked.

User avatar
Geoff the Medio
Programming, Design, Admin
Posts: 12676
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 1:33 am
Location: Munich

Re: 0.4.10 release

#22 Post by Geoff the Medio » Wed May 13, 2020 6:45 pm

Vezzra wrote:
Wed May 13, 2020 6:15 pm
...adjust the description of the "Support" forum ...
I added "on GitHub" to the description. Was that more or less what you had in mind?

User avatar
Vezzra
Release Manager, Design
Posts: 5295
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 12:56 pm
Location: Sol III

Re: 0.4.10 release

#23 Post by Vezzra » Sun May 17, 2020 11:52 am

Geoff the Medio wrote:
Wed May 13, 2020 6:45 pm
I added "on GitHub" to the description. Was that more or less what you had in mind?
Certainly an improvement at least. Let's see if it is sufficient.

User avatar
Vezzra
Release Manager, Design
Posts: 5295
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 12:56 pm
Location: Sol III

Re: 0.4.10 release

#24 Post by Vezzra » Sun May 17, 2020 1:54 pm

As usual when we try to get out a new release, dev activity seems to increase as people try to get their favorite projects/features/changes into the release, while certain release-blocking stuff lacks the attention it should get.

However, in order to get the release out within reasonable time (that is, before Ragnarök 8)), we/I have to draw the line somewhere, and I think we're at this point with 0.4.10 now. After all, this release has been supposed to be a "quick" one, with the main focus on the Python3 migration, which has been done for quite some time already.

The problem are the still open release-blocking issues and PRs. We're down to three items on that list as of the time of this post, and most of those should be able to be resolved/merged within the next week. I ask all active devs/contributors to focus their efforts on these, set aside other things which are not of equal importance for the 0.4.10 release, and refrain from merging stuff that's not related to address release-blocking issues.

If possible, I want to go ahead with the creation of the release branch coming Sunday, May 24th. However, that at least requires that only a very few (one or two) of the release blocking issues/PRs remain, preferably of course would be if all could be finished/resolved. So, please, everyone, help to achieve this, I really want to get on with the release process.

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 2712
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: 0.4.10 release

#25 Post by Oberlus » Sun May 17, 2020 2:48 pm

#2956 should be fixed now.

#2932 would need AI adjustments, maybe, to account for rearranged prerequisites and the new environment tolerances of Exobots. I don't have the skills.
If v0.4.10 can get out fast and this PR be merged into master instead, that would work for the multiplayer games.

#2907 doesn't seem to be solvable unless someone else encounters the problem, which has not happened yet. I would remove it from from milestones.

Ophiuchus
Programmer
Posts: 1533
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:01 am
Location: Wall IV

Re: 0.4.10 release

#26 Post by Ophiuchus » Mon May 18, 2020 1:45 pm

Oberlus wrote:
Sun May 17, 2020 2:48 pm
#2932 would need AI adjustments, maybe, to account for rearranged prerequisites and the new environment tolerances of Exobots. I don't have the skills.
I looked at the source, I can add mindless effect to max population estimation (if i get what it does). Code is here: PR-2961

The other handling for exobots is the priority of tech research. I could change that but I need some heuristics for that. Please have a look at default/python/AI/TechsListsAI.py and maybe suggest switching of order of techs.
Any code or patches in anything posted here is released under the CC and GPL licences in use for the FO project.

Furthermore, I propse... we should default to four combat rounds instead of three ...for the good of playerkind.

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 2712
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: 0.4.10 release

#27 Post by Oberlus » Mon May 18, 2020 3:02 pm

Ophiuchus wrote:
Mon May 18, 2020 1:45 pm
The other handling for exobots is the priority of tech research. I could change that but I need some heuristics for that. Please have a look at default/python/AI/TechsListsAI.py and maybe suggest switching of order of techs.
I've been looking into TechsListsAI.py.
It seems to me the main heuristic is to put in following TechGroups the techs that depend on previous ones. And to put in higher (later) or lower (sooner) TechGroups the techs you want to be researched later or sooner.
In this case, Exobots, that require Sentient Automation (Adaptive Automation), is placed in several groups together with Sentient Automation. Hence, no need to change that because of Exobots not having now the AA prerequisite.
Regarding AA not needing now Artificial Minds (Nascent AI), both techs are usually placed in different TechGroups (NAI sooner than AA). Since AA has a greater research cost than NAI, that might still make sense. However, in some cases (some of the Sparse TechGroups) they are placed in the same group. So, again, there might be no need to make any change here.
We would need someone familiarized with AI python code to really assess this and propose changes.
Anyways, your PR should be merged ASAP.

Ophiuchus
Programmer
Posts: 1533
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:01 am
Location: Wall IV

Re: 0.4.10 release

#28 Post by Ophiuchus » Mon May 18, 2020 6:02 pm

Oberlus wrote:
Mon May 18, 2020 3:02 pm
...
No, you got it mostly how the AI works. The different mixes are mostly AI aggression AFAICR and sparse universe or not. The question for the groups would be if it should be researched in a different order (e.g. now exobots could be researched earlier). And then there is a way to fasttrack things, like say you have colonies with gas giants in the same system and you fasttrack GGG tech.

So if you say the order makes still sense there are not really further AI changes necessary.
Any code or patches in anything posted here is released under the CC and GPL licences in use for the FO project.

Furthermore, I propse... we should default to four combat rounds instead of three ...for the good of playerkind.

Ophiuchus
Programmer
Posts: 1533
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:01 am
Location: Wall IV

Re: 0.4.10 release

#29 Post by Ophiuchus » Tue May 19, 2020 9:24 am

Can we have some time-constrained polishing phases when we do the next release?

Roughly I mean something like this:
  1. add all the features/mechanics
  2. feature freeze - start polishing (do not accept any new features into master if not release-blocking)
  3. 1 to 3 weeks special focus playtesting/content balance: check player-vs-players and player-vs-AIs balancing; player-vs-monsters and AI-vs-monsters; also bugfixing, AI, stringtables
  4. balancing freeze (do not accept any balancing changes into master if not severe); compile Release Notes; start QA
  5. 1 to 2 weeks special focus on stringtables/encyclopedia, icons and improving AI; also bugfixing
  6. make release branch (freezing master for up to a month should be ok in my opinion), thaw master
  7. bugfixing and RCs like we do now
  8. ship it
edit1: forgot monsters again, seeing that we did not do a pass on the monsters actually prompted me to post this
Any code or patches in anything posted here is released under the CC and GPL licences in use for the FO project.

Furthermore, I propse... we should default to four combat rounds instead of three ...for the good of playerkind.

User avatar
Vezzra
Release Manager, Design
Posts: 5295
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 12:56 pm
Location: Sol III

Re: 0.4.10 release

#30 Post by Vezzra » Thu May 21, 2020 1:40 pm

Most of the issues/PRs assigned to the 0.4.10 milestone seem to be sorted out and/or ready for merge, #2907 can probably be demoted to optional.

So far, so good, what worries me however are the many complaints and issues about recent test builds being unstable and crash-prone. Although it looks like you guys managed to address much of it, I'm still wondering how stable latest master really is, and if I should proceed with the creation of the release branch coming Sunday, or postpone it so master cen get more stable again before I create the release branch.

Can you give me some feedback on how stable master has become with the latest fixes? Maybe wait another week and see how well the next test builds do? Or are things already stable enough to go ahead with the original schedule and create the release branch on Sunday?

Post Reply