Author Topic: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure  (Read 83162 times)

Rocinante

  • Posts: 642
  • Turrets: +252/-668
    • My Homepage
Re: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure
« Reply #120 on: September 15, 2008, 11:12:14 pm »
And of course, MG speaks for ALL of the tremulous community.. Wait.. no it doesn't. It's just an elitist clique selfassigned to takeover and direct the development of future tremulous versions and as such trying to be the group that sanctions what is allowed and what not.. and abusing anyone that does have a different opinion or idea where everything is going. (Much like religious groups apparently)

Just because you got banned by a moderator for spouting off, who happens to be a MG member, doesn't make your wildass theories true.  Stop spamming people's topics with your personal agenda, again.
}MG{Mercenaries Guild
"On my ship, the Rocinante, wheeling through the galaxies, headed for the heart of Cygnus, headlong into mystery." -- Rush, "Cygnus X-1"

Azrael07

  • Posts: 33
  • Turrets: +3/-13
Re: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure
« Reply #121 on: September 15, 2008, 11:22:17 pm »
@tuple: had you read previous posts ? ...

Quote
I believe I made the first suggestion that tremfusion get their own forums.  Based on the statements of members of the tremfusion dev team that they are forking, aim to steal tremulous players (in affect, attempting to damage one free community for the furtherance of your own), intend to break compatibility when tremfusion has a sufficient player base ( as mentioned previously, by "stealing" tremulous players), etc, it does not seem unreasonable that I am bothered by the apparent attempt to damage one community solely to benefit your own.  Personally, I have no real problem with forks if they are reasonable.  But for gods sake, if you intend to stand on your own two feet, then do that.  Attempting to benefit a community by actively damaging another is pretty low, and I've read too many statements that indicate to me that even if tremfusion now intends to maintain compatibility, I don't think I could accept that statement on its face considering there was once and may still be a stated intent to maintain community ties in order to further your own community at the express expense of another...   People will do as they wish and go where they wish, including speaking their mind about your actions.

About "stealing" players... yes, of course, we stole your players, players are simply cattle, and we are able to control as we wish.
And, of course, we start this debate only to steal your precious players.

As I said upper, we will not break binary and network compatibility, take this as an official announcement from tremfusion dev team.

Oh, and yes, I damage a community only for my benfit, yes, of course. I work 8 hours per day on a game developpement, only for my benefit, and only to steal your players and ruin tremulous and it's community. And I'm a terrorist too.

For a very long time ago we try to talk with your team. Amanieu had postulate in MG team for a long time ago, if I'm right you never accepted him (I'm not sure about this story, I can't remember very well).
I tried to take contact with you before tremfusion creation here http://www.mercenariesguild.net/forum/index.php?topic=909.0

Answer was very clear, kevlarman made a good summary : NO

And now we continue to try to talk, I open private message with all your guy to try to speak, debate, and explain my opinion to you.
And you continue to spit on me and on tremfusion team.

You don't think it's... too much ?

Now, quote-war time....
Quote
Now I see one member state you are forking, while another says you are not.  And then an argument on semantics.  I can't say its not, but I certainly can't say I'm not suspicious of the motives of a group who acts in such a manner.  Perhaps if an honest and cohesive answer about the direction of tremfusion could be given it would have some meaning.  Unfortunately, there has been so much damage done in terms of trust that I doubt anything but long term action will rebuild that bridge.

You really don't read posts.... Look upper, I explain all about "forking or not forking"... You want a simply reply "we fork" or "we don't fork" ? You will havn't. Instead, you have a full explanation about what we are and what we plane to do. As I said, "fork" is only a word.

Quote
My thoughts about sv_pure are that members of the tremfusion team do not appear to remember the various pk3's that have been added to base by ignorant and/or uncaring  admins that are then downloaded by everyone who connects, and loaded every time they connect to non-pure servers.  People who have a large number of maps/base mods have a hell of a time tracking down which pk3 is causing these issues on non pure servers, particularly when there are multiple base/mod directories and the mod/map causing issues may have the same name as an existing one.  super size tyrants?  Various sound mods?  A server running a mod out of the base directory?  On a non-pure server it would be a no-brainer for a malicious/ignorant admin to create pk3's with a name that puts it in the front of the path list and is filled with bogus and/or messed up models/textures/etc that just happen to be named after all of the textures in ATCS, or whichever.   sv_pure helps to maintain a consistent environment for all players within a server and across servers.  Can it be broken? Sure, but you will have noone to blame but yourself when all sorts of crazy shit starts happening to your tremulous experience and the experience of those who visit your server, and any subsequent non pure server.  If you are a coder and/or knowledgable about these things, it can be relatively simple to locate these problems.  If you don't know how to find your qkey, you will have a hell of a time.  Personally, I would prefer if people didn't have their tremulous installs ruined by visiting a server.

Not to mention that by bypassing pure, a client is actively cheating, or, going against the rules of the server operator.

Anyone remember mappers releasing different versions of a map, but with the same named pk3 file?  unpure servers had a hell of a time with this, pure servers mostly didn't notice.  On unpure servers, you would actually start playing on a map that differed from the map the server used.  Quite confusing to say the least.  How much of a problem this would appear to be would depend on how many and what kind of changes were made to the pk3.

Is it simply a FUD or you really hadn't read previous posts ? So read first amanieu post and look what we did instead of sv_pure....

Quote
And Bissig, get a grip.  There are members of MG who have been involved in some way in tremulous for more than 2 years now.  We've been actively attempted to benefit the tremulous community for quite some time, it was part of our charter and continues to be an important aspect of the group.

And I do stuff for 2 years ago too... I created the french community website, qvm used on most part of french and italian servers, some patch used in every good servers. You think you are only one doing stuff ? This boad isn't the only one tremulous forum...

Oh, then, yes, Tremfusion will create its own forum, we work on it. And tremulous players, developpers and MG will be welcomed to talk, and to make criticize against tremfusion, if it's real debates and not only flaming like what you're currently doing. We don't try to kick away people simply because we don't agree with them, or because, so called, "it's not same game"
« Last Edit: September 15, 2008, 11:25:24 pm by Azrael07 »

Bissig

  • Posts: 1309
  • Turrets: +103/-131
Re: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure
« Reply #122 on: September 15, 2008, 11:24:29 pm »
Seriously Bissig, cool it. We don't need to hear your age-old vendetta with MG. They contribute much more than any other guild so far (although I have high hopes for Void). Not to mention the fact that they're developing 1.2.

Sure, and the pope is a weasel.

They host servers that claim to be development servers and are empty everytime I take a look at them in the server browser. They oppose anything that seems to be a none MG opinion. And members of that guild use their moderator status to enforce MG's view upon all of the tremulous community. Where the hell is the much acclaimed progress? "Jumpable barricades" - wow. And slow turrets. Great. And an unreadable font. Semipure of course is no cheat. Whereas things other people do to fix that stupid pure system are.

So, WHAT is MG doing FOR tremulous and not for their guild?

David

  • Spam Killer
  • *
  • Posts: 3543
  • Turrets: +249/-273
Re: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure
« Reply #123 on: September 15, 2008, 11:41:11 pm »
Is it simply a FUD or you really hadn't read previous posts ? So read first amanieu post and look what we did instead of sv_pure....

I believe tuples was more refering to your idea of servers disabling sv_pure.
You have what? 5 users? 10?  They will be fine, the other 20k will all be screwed by non-pure servers.  (This is a number I pulled out of my arse based on ~8k unique players per day.)
Any maps not in the MG repo?  Email me or come to irc.freenode.net/#mg.
--
My words are mine and mine alone.  I can't speak for anyone else, and there is no one who can speak for me.  If I ever make a post that gives the opinions or positions of other users or groups, then they will be clearly labeled as such.
I'm disappointed that people's past actions have forced me to state what should be obvious.
I am not a dev.  Nothing I say counts for anything.

Posts

  • Posts: 19
  • Turrets: +6/-2
Re: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure
« Reply #124 on: September 16, 2008, 12:04:18 am »
it would be helpful if all the sv_pure info in the trem universe were to be combined into a wiki page, there is too much stuff to sort through.

on http://www.tremfusion.net/trac/wiki/FeaturesList
"New sv_pure system"
and elsewhere, it wasn't clear what became of the sv_pure cvar: what effect does 1 and 0 have

are you saying that we should get rid of or keep the Official Trem sv_pure 1 effect as an option, maybe as option 2 instead of 1? (i'm using a fuzzy chain of thought)

if you were making the decision for the 1.2 release sv_pure system, would it be the same as fusion or different?

also, optional reading:
http://developer.valvesoftware.com/wiki/Pure_Servers
in the half-life universe, sv_pure is 0 by default, awareness of it is low, most people only think of the anticheat system which provides zero protections against the cheat artwork/models that sv_pure blocks.
sv_pure 1, uses server customizable restrictions
sv_pure 2, is 100% restricted.
no matter what half-life doesn't let servers muck around with already existing files, though servers can give useless data for a file that the client doesn't yet have, if the player goes to another server that needs the correct file the client will disconnect with a "differs from server" message instead of downloading it.
« Last Edit: September 16, 2008, 12:19:36 am by Posts »

Syntac

  • Posts: 841
  • Turrets: +118/-104
    • Syntac's Stuff
Re: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure
« Reply #125 on: September 16, 2008, 12:24:19 am »
Sure, and the pope is a weasel.

They host servers that claim to be development servers and are empty everytime I take a look at them in the server browser. They oppose anything that seems to be a none MG opinion. And members of that guild use their moderator status to enforce MG's view upon all of the tremulous community. Where the hell is the much acclaimed progress? "Jumpable barricades" - wow. And slow turrets. Great. And an unreadable font. Semipure of course is no cheat. Whereas things other people do to fix that stupid pure system are.

So, WHAT is MG doing FOR tremulous and not for their guild?
Like I said, they're developing 1.2. Just because the servers are empty when you look at them...

They only use their moderator status when arguments get out of control. Give me one example of a thread where you can honestly say they abused their powers.

Of course they oppose non-MG opinions. You oppose non-Bissig opinions. I oppose non-Syntac opinions.

As for the so-called "lack of progress": There are more changes than are noticeable from your clearly scant observations. Stability fixes. Balance adjustments. New features. You didn't take the time to wonder: "Is there more to this than meets the eye?"

Lava Croft

  • Guest
Re: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure
« Reply #126 on: September 16, 2008, 06:17:43 am »
While I certainly don't agree with MG's 'we are Tremulous' attitude, I think Bissig is completely missing the mark with his retarded comments that only show what he is not doing for Tremulous.

Let us please keep on discussing sv_pure, instead of discussing wether we should wear tinfoil hats to protect ourselves against MG's plans for world domination.


Amanieu

  • Posts: 647
  • Turrets: +135/-83
    • Amanieu
Re: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure
« Reply #127 on: September 16, 2008, 06:36:56 am »
I re-added pure to Tremfusion with the sv_restricted cvar, because some good points for pure were brought up in this thread. However, it will be disabled by default.
http://www.tremfusion.net/hg/tremfusion/rev/ddea8bb4c259
Quote
< kevlarman> zakk is getting his patches from shady frenchmen on irc
< kevlarman> this can't be a good sign :P

fingered banana

  • Guest
Re: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure
« Reply #128 on: September 16, 2008, 09:57:16 am »
LOL As if server default values are important. Server admins change them anyway

David

  • Spam Killer
  • *
  • Posts: 3543
  • Turrets: +249/-273
Re: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure
« Reply #129 on: September 16, 2008, 11:58:15 am »
How about:  sv_pure 0 does what it does now.  sv_pure 1 does same.  sv_pure 2 is client can do what they want.
Also, renaming sv_pure is basically breaking compatibility with 1.1.
What does the 1.1 client do if there is no sv_pure?  Its part of getInfoResponse so therefore "guaranteed" to be there, so I would assume the behaviour in that case was never defined?
Any maps not in the MG repo?  Email me or come to irc.freenode.net/#mg.
--
My words are mine and mine alone.  I can't speak for anyone else, and there is no one who can speak for me.  If I ever make a post that gives the opinions or positions of other users or groups, then they will be clearly labeled as such.
I'm disappointed that people's past actions have forced me to state what should be obvious.
I am not a dev.  Nothing I say counts for anything.

Amanieu

  • Posts: 647
  • Turrets: +135/-83
    • Amanieu
Re: Tremfusion's opinion concerning sv_pure
« Reply #130 on: September 16, 2008, 01:50:23 pm »
The 1.1 client barely uses the value of sv_pure. All it looks at is sv_paks and sv_pakNames.
Quote
< kevlarman> zakk is getting his patches from shady frenchmen on irc
< kevlarman> this can't be a good sign :P