Wiki OXP list, v1.80 and OXP/OXZ compatibility

[phkb]

Just curious - the Wiki OXP list (http://wiki.alioth.net/index.php/OXP_List) has a column called "C" relating to compatibility with v1.76 and 1.77. With 1.80 out, and some OXP's needing 1.80 to work (ie. anything using a MFD), how should this column be used?

Currently the options (as described on the page) are:
Y = 1.76.1 compatible
Y* = 1.76.1 compatible with caveats
N = incompatible with 1.76.1
N* = incompatible with 1.76.1 but a fix is described
blank = unknown/untested with 1.76.1
T = 1.77 only

What is done with the column will largely be based on what we want to communicate. At the moment the column seemed to be targeted at users of 1.76.1 (that is, all the values are related to 1.76.1). Not sure I have a suggestion for the best fix, but maybe changing the column to be "Min version" would be a better way of encompassing all possibilities?

[maik]

It should be updated to indicate which OXPs are compatible with 1.80. Any other version compatibility is not relevant for users IMHO. 1.80 version compatibility should ideally only say "Y" if the OXP indeed has been converted properly, e.g. makes use of new ship roles. Y* could indicate that it needs an additional install, like cim's ship roles compatibility fix, which should then be clarified on the OXP's wiki page. "N" should indicate OXPs that do not work with 1.80.

Everybody is free to go through the list and update. At the moment, I have next to no time to look after these things.

[demon59]

Some indication of backward compatibility would be nice for those of us who prefer v1.77 to v1.80.

Just sayin'...

[Zireael]

It should be updated to indicate which OXPs are compatible with 1.80. Any other version compatibility is not relevant for users IMHO. 1.80 version compatibility should ideally only say "Y" if the OXP indeed has been converted properly, e.g. makes use of new ship roles. Y* could indicate that it needs an additional install, like cim's ship roles compatibility fix, which should then be clarified on the OXP's wiki page. "N" should indicate OXPs that do not work with 1.80.

Everybody is free to go through the list and update. At the moment, I have next to no time to look after these things.

I agree with what was said.

[phkb]

Dragging this one up, I'm thinking about updating the "C" column of the OXP list on the Wiki with a new system. Here's what I'm proposing:
Main character would be the version the OXP was released/last updated for:

• A = pre 1.76
• B = 1.76
• C = 1.77
• D = 1.80
• E = 1.82
• blank = unknown

And then there would be suffixes

• - (minus) = incompatible with latest version
• * = compatible with latest version but with caveats/fixes
• . (period) = also available via download manager
• u = OXP is currently unsupported

If no "-" is present it is assumed to be compatible with the latest version.

So an entry of "D." would mean it was released for version 1.80 but is compatible with the current version and is available via the download manager. An entry of "C-" would mean it was released for 1.77 and is not compatible with the latest version.

What do you think? Does that cover everything? Scratch that. It can never cover everything. Perhaps a better question is, will it be provide sufficient information to someone scanning the list looking for version-specific OXP's?

[Wildeblood]

I'm thinking about updating the "C" column of the OXP list on the Wiki with a new system. Here's what I'm proposing:
Main character would be the version the OXP was released/last updated for:

• A = pre 1.76
• B = 1.76
• C = 1.77
• D = 1.80
• E = 1.82
• blank = unknown

Why use letters; why not just put the number there?

[phkb]

I was trying to keep the column width down to a minimum. But that would work too.

[maik]

Since that column takes a lot of effort to update when a new oolite version is out and hardly anyone does it, I propose to scrap the column altogether.

[Smivs]

I'm minded to agree.
When the table was overhauled and transformed into its current form there was a case for the compatibility column, but today it is much less relevant. And in truth I don't think it has ever been completely correct since then, for the reason Maik cites.
Instead of worrying about compatibility with older versions, we should be doing all we can to get as many OXPs as possible worrking with v1.82 and urging and encouraging people to use the current version.

[Cody]

<nods>

[spara]

The function of the oxp list has changed a bit with the in-game manager as it's the primary source for oxps. The in-game manager has an in-built compatibility field, so the column in wiki is actually redundant. On top of being out of sync. I there was a vote, I would vote 'Yes' for maik's proposal.

[phkb]

Rather than just remove the column, how about just making it a single flag, Y/N, to indicate whether the pack is available via the download manager? That would be useful information I think, and not subject to a lot of change.

[Diziet Sma]

Rather than just remove the column, how about just making it a single flag, Y/N, to indicate whether the pack is available via the download manager? That would be useful information I think, and not subject to a lot of change.

That strikes me as much more useful.. nice idea.

[maik]

Yes, why not? It would just be nice if a volunteer or two went through the complete list once to change all entries. Afterwards it's again up to kind people to update when there is a change.

[Norby]

went through the complete list once to change all entries.

Done from A to G so far, plus the short "WIP" and "OXPs with problems" sections at the end.

I hope but can not guarantee that without mistakes, for example many OXPs changed names during OXZ making and I do not know whether I successfully hunted down all of them.