(31 Jul 15, 01:10PM)Luc@s Wrote: Indeed, you don't understand. And your comparison is again, irrelevant.
We are not talking about fixes, we are talking about a project which requires the involvement of the whole team on the long term. The features mentioned in this thread are maybe 15% of the project. Do you have any idea what we are talking about ? I don't think so. It clearly doesn't look like you do.
Like I said before, you don't want to ask for a change in an open source project by creating a closed source fork, and then demanding your private changes to be merged. C.f. stef's post.
(31 Jul 15, 01:10PM)Luc@s Wrote: We want a global change for the game - that involve much more than a "merge request" can do. We need a domain name, a website, authentication, account registration. We need many testers, many contributors in different area (for instance designing the website, the different features, and defining competitive standards).
Much bigger changes than those you want to make (as far as we can tell, because once again it's hard to see what changes you've actually made to the game without running a third-party executable and without code) have been made to much bigger projects than AC with just pull requests. The tools provided by github/bitbucket and the likes are adapted to those cases, and scale vertically very well.
(31 Jul 15, 01:10PM)Luc@s Wrote: Your comparisons are offtopic, same as your attempt to turn it into a opensource vs close source debate which is again not the matter at all.
It is definitely a big part of the issue at hand, it's usually very convenient to have some code to show to the developers you're trying to convince to implement/include your changes. But even beyond that, the mere idea of not leaving your code open is a mistake (for all the reasons I wrote in my post).
(31 Jul 15, 01:10PM)Luc@s Wrote: I've done similar things in the past already, why are you trying to make it look like i don't know it /can/ work sometimes. I like to refer to the example of akimbo and the autodownload, because i had to work on the whole thing from the beginning. But two devs helped me with it (tempest and cleaner). They knew it was a good project and worked on it. Currently, i don't see any active developer who looks interested in the project and who wants to help. In this case, how is it going to get implemented ? I have 0 guarantee. And in this case, the only option left would be to make it a mod for AC, and to make an "external" league based on our mod. Which is obviously not the solution i prefer.
It used to work, back in the days of AC < 1.0. The community could just make a thread on the forums to voice their ideas, and people in charge of development would consider/discuss them. It's not possible to do that now, since the community has significantly grown in size, developers don't want to weed through 300+ messages (most of which only contain unconstructive complaints, nowadays). The whole point of using github is to centralize the issues into a single place (the issue tracker), where each issue is discussed separately and assigned to a developer for them to fix. Pull requests are used to allow you to contribute to the project directly by implementing what you want to see the game use (you usually implement your ideas after discussing them in an issue on the tracker, to prevent you from wasting your time on coding something that the official developers think doesn't fit into the project), and to seperate a large amount of changes into small parts that the developers can pick individually. You can even fix some issues yourself if you don't want to wait for the people in charge to do it. I'm not saying everything would have gone your way if you had done that in the first place, but it would have certainly prevented miscommunication as to what was a good fit for AC, and also prevented discussions to spread over 10+ threads.
On a seperate note: nobody (except Torvalds maybe) ever gets their point across by writing bitter messages and throwing insults wrapped in frustration on a public discussion platform, this is dragging you down and you should drop it. If you are confident your point of view on things is the best one, you can still move on with your work without telling everyone they don't understand and don't make relevant observations.
About the wallhack thing: it would be a major contradiction not to include it, especially considering it's a useful tool to use when watching demos, and also considering that there's already plenty of code that can be used as-is to create cheats in the project (like the bot's aiming aids, as stated before). It will not help people create cheats more easily, since there are already plenty of public cheats online that allow players to wallhack in AC, it will just stall AC itself. And even if the code wasn't included, there's plenty of documentation online about how to apply semi-transparency to opengl textures, so not including it is a kind of security through obscurity, except the feature isn't implemented at all.