User Tag List

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 28

Thread: The test tank

  1. #11
    No Products Registered

    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    2,289
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Re: The test tank

    The popup, (while annoying) is supposed to exhibit at runtime so that anything created with the extension will alert users of an executable. So, maybe I don't understand you there, Andos

    What would be a good solution, but would probably require modification of MMF2 itself, is to be able to make a beta extension un-compilable. In other words, you could NOT generate an exe or even a Vitalize app with the unreleased version of the extension. Is this, in theory, technically possible if MMF2 were modified?

    We can keep this area for now, but I would like to suggest an interesting idea, (something that Joewski, who has really taken on the Click WIKI, might be game for) and that is for the developers here to spearhead a real movement towards a development environment for MMF2 extensions and movements. They would be independent extensions and testing could be done in the same location. This idea could be strongly promoted on the forums here, once it is in place.

    From there, the politics are up to the community of developers who work together to create and publish new extensions, (and you know that CT would support the outcome as far as news on the site and the forum goes.) I mean, you might go open-source, or you might just want to encourage the creation of as many useful and powerful extensions, movements, etc., as is possible -- and keep them free and easily avialable.

    I would like to interject here that one request I would have, (and I think everyone here, by now, knows the reasons for it) is that altruistic developers who are not doing open-source, could be encouraged to entrust up-to-date copies of source code for safe-keeping and potential updating for future versions, at the very least. Maybe the community could create various levels of what the code could be used in the future and under what conditions?

    As you all know, myself and CT, have certain extensions, or even updates on stock ones, that we want or really need to have done for specific, practical reasons. Those may be privately contracted and testing would be done in whatever ways we find most practical. Perhaps we can arrange to at least privately notify developers when they are duplicating an idea we already have in production? I am not sure, but that may be workable and pragmatic to avoid redundant work.


  2. #12
    Clicker Multimedia Fusion 2 DeveloperSWF Export Module

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    6,773
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: The test tank

    You can make an extension uncompilable quite easily... I think vortex knows how.

  3. #13
    Forum Moderator Fusion 2.5 DeveloperAndroid Export ModuleiOS Export ModuleSWF Export ModuleInstall Creator Pro
    Fusion 2.5 (Steam)Fusion 2.5 Developer (Steam)Fusion 2.5+ DLC (Steam)Android Export Module (Steam)HTML5 Export Module (Steam)iOS Export Module (Steam)Universal Windows Platform Export Module (Steam)

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    England
    Posts
    3,515
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Re: The test tank

    Quote Originally Posted by Jam
    You can make an extension uncompilable quite easily... I think vortex knows how.
    As Turbo once wrote:
    Code:
    LPCSTR* WINAPI DLLExport GetDependencies(mv _far *mV, LPEDATA edPtr)
    {
    	return NULL;
    }
    .:::.Joshtek.:::.

  4. #14
    Clicker Multimedia Fusion 2 DeveloperiOS Export ModuleSWF Export ModuleUnicode Add-on
    LIJI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Israel
    Posts
    1,175
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: The test tank

    Yeah, that's an SDK bug that will make the exe goes 0 bytes.

  5. #15
    Forum Moderator Fusion 2.5 DeveloperFusion 2.5+ DLCAndroid Export ModuleHTML5 Export ModuleiOS Export ModuleSWF Export ModuleMac Export Module
    AndyH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,445
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: The test tank

    The testing group was a good idea, but obviously did not work as well as people hoped.

    A developer would look to the group to be always there and active, while people in the group are all of different interests and not necessarily able to dedicate their time 24/7 to testing every extension dropped in over time.

    I think another approach that could be taken, based upon a more open beta testing as being discussed above is for an extension developer to request people put their names forward if they would be interested in participating in testing your object. You then have a list of people, and they know what they are being asked to do and when they are being asked to do it. You will still ahve people drop out and some people more active than others, but you can manage the relationships and everyone knows where they stand.

    It might not be a bad idea to split the public extension forum into two -

    1) The current extension forum for released extensions, general extension chat and support.

    2) A new "Public beta" extension forum, for developers to have a means of managing their testing. This has benefits that users will not be confused between what are beta testing and what are released extensions, and developers & testers alike will be able to easily find all the threads related to their activities.

    Although anoying, the pop up dialog is very important and I believe should remain because we need to ensure beta extensions do not get mixed in with released extensions. For one support would be a nightmare because beta extensions can change radically over their lifetime and I'm sure no one wants to have to try to manage different builds of extensions.


    I also think that it is important to keep some private forums so that extension developers can work closely with each other and with Clickteam. The thing with a private forum though is to make sure that new developers who appear on the scene can have an opportunity to join - especially if it looks like they are here for the long term. I think you've got this working pretty well so far.
    Andy H @ ovine.net
    Awful Jokes - a new cartoon every day: http://awful.ovine.net/
    Ovine's games: http://www.ovine.net

  6. #16
    Clickteam Clickteam
    Anders's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Denmark, ┼rhus
    Posts
    3,455
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Re: The test tank

    Actually I think you can just put the popup in the runtime version of the extension. MMF2 seems to use the edittime extension at runtime when runned from MMF2 and only use the runtime extension when saved as an .exe

    Also if you use that SDK bug to make exe files 0 bytes in size, the users of the extension would probably try to copy the edittime extension over in the runtime folder but then you will just get the annoying popup there and maybe the extension could force the game/app to close after that.


    Novabrain:
    I'm just saying that those popups you get every single time you run a file using a beta-extension really annoys the tester. I can remember several times I've stopped testing an extension because of it. If the popup only is displayed when the user tries to use them in exes and other places then I don't see a problem.

  7. #17
    Clicker Multimedia Fusion 2 DeveloperSWF Export Module

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    6,773
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: The test tank

    You use the SDK bug in the edittime version as well.

    Popups are useless!

    I can't make it clear enough! It takes 2 minutes to remove the popup completely, and I can prove it too.

  8. #18
    Clickteam Clickteam
    Anders's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Denmark, ┼rhus
    Posts
    3,455
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Re: The test tank

    If people really want to go so far just to use an unfinished extension I wouldn't care much It's just a waste of energy for them and they will just run into problems later. I don't see why it should be "illegal" to use them before they are done, the popups are just there to encourage them to wait.

  9. #19
    Clickteam Clickteam
    Jeff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Battle Ground Washington
    Posts
    11,822
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Re: The test tank

    On public versus private testing:

    I am all for public testing of extensions but I worry the extension developers would get bothered to death.

    the one nice thing about popups is at least a user can see the extension is not yet completed and they use it at their own risk.

    If they hack out the popup and then later complain about a more recent version of the object being incompatible thats a risk they take.

    I agree with Andos its their time and energy to waste.

  10. #20
    Clicker Multimedia Fusion 2 DeveloperSWF Export Module

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    6,773
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Re: The test tank

    It isn't a waste of energy because when you know how you can do it in (literally) 30 seconds.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Tank turret
    By Robin_Manager in forum Multimedia Fusion 2 - Technical Support
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 18th August 2008, 05:15 PM
  2. Regarding Test Tank Releases
    By Novabrain in forum Extension Developers Lobby
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 27th October 2007, 10:27 AM
  3. Help with a tank game
    By AusZero in forum The Games Factory 2 - Technical Support
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 4th June 2007, 02:55 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •