[X] My Assistant

The typo was in HVSTAT 5.3.3.1, I had corrected it in the code I posted, but GaryMcNabb did not mention this, so I assumed he had missed that correction.

As I appreciate you guys' work, you are also making the whole project as chaoic as ever.

1. I do think most people would like to have 1 patch in 2-3 weeks which contains several updates rather than 14 patches everyone which contains a bit of improvement. Just see how many patches you guys have posted in the last few days.
Just don't rush to name every update first: test it among yourselves, see if there's any problems, then publish that in a package. This has become a collaborated work, so please make it work like a collaborated work instead of several individual small improvements made by separate people.

2. Naming:
Most people don't even remember the 'major milestone' from v.4.0 and v.5.0. It's better if you guys naming as
1st and 2nd: Follow the major HV version (0.6.9 -> 6.9)
3rd: new feature packs
4th: bug fix/dev build

It should work better as people will then understand if their version matches the latest HV patch.

3. A better way to explain what you have changed. Why do you guys need to ask the others every time something has changed?

Please remember, it's a program for players to use, not to confuse them.

As I appreciate you guys' work, you are also making the whole project as chaoic as ever.

1. I do think most people would like to have 1 patch in 2-3 weeks which contains several updates rather than 14 patches everyone which contains a bit of improvement. Just see how many patches you guys have posted in the last few days.
Just don't rush to name every update first: test it among yourselves, see if there's any problems, then publish that in a package. This has become a collaborated work, so please make it work like a collaborated work instead of several individual small improvements made by separate people.

2. Naming:
Most people don't even remember the 'major milestone' from v.4.0 and v.5.0. It's better if you guys naming as
1st and 2nd: Follow the major HV version (0.6.9 -> 6.9)
3rd: new feature packs
4th: bug fix/dev build

It should work better as people will then understand if their version matches the latest HV patch.

3. A better way to explain what you have changed. Why do you guys need to ask the others every time something has changed?

Please remember, it's a program for players to use, not to confuse them.

Sometimes you're annoying as fuck, varst. Do you know that?

Sometimes you're annoying as fuck, varst. Do you know that?

Yes. But I won't retreat my words just because it's annoying.
The word is harsh, but look at the patches put forward yesterday and the related discussion.

This post has been edited by varst: Jul 26 2012, 07:27

Sometimes you're annoying as fuck, varst. Do you know that?

Though he do have a point Evil, :3

As for the patches, well, people can just upgrade every few weeks if they prefer too, as it is now, we are just release the latest version for those interested.

@ Varst: Have you seen open source projects? They typically have a lot of people with commit access that publish minor tweaks all the time. What you're asking is for people to wait until they've got a "Stable" release before publishing, but this thread is more like a SVN because there is no real version control involved. I personally prefer that we keep this always-updated branch (even if it may have more bugs) in this thread, and possibly update the OP for "major" releases.

This type of project is developed in a bazaar. If you want a more structured system with many collaborators, you are going to need a versioning system or other formal tracking structure that large projects use. Subversion, Git, etc.

This post has been edited by DarkDespair5: Jul 26 2012, 09:47

Nobody is forcing anyone to download the latest bugfix. I personally like having 1 bug fixed releases. Denying that to people that want it for the sake of not annoying people who prefer there not to be is kinda silly... If you don't want it don't download it.

We could properly refer to them as dev versions... its a given but we could make it "official"...
As for having a designated "stable" version... that would require dedicated QC volunteers who avoid upgrading and stick with one version and extensively test it... So unless and until we get people who wanna do that it will have to be a rolling beta with frequent dev versions and people who don't like updating often can update every 2 weeks+ if they so desire.

Also, why is it necessary to follow the HV version numbers? And why only the last two numbers? (if HV ever gets to 1.0.0 it will break the naming system as 0.0.0.0 and 1.0.0.0.0 are both lower versions then 9.9.0.0

GaryMcNabb said he liked the version numbering I suggested in #4... well
<MrTT> So, did you see my suggestion about versioning?
<GaryMcNabb> yeah, sounds good

Anyone else has a view on it?

This post has been edited by mrttao: Jul 26 2012, 10:07

Yes. But I won't retreat my words just because it's annoying.
The word is harsh, but look at the patches put forward yesterday and the related discussion.

"When at Rome, do as the Romans do". Nuff said.

I personally prefer that we keep this always-updated branch (even if it may have more bugs) in this thread, and possibly update the OP for "major" releases.

That's basically what I mean; just like minecraft where people can try the new 'dev' unofficial builds, while the 'official' build which contains several updates (possibly tested in the 'dev' period)
Sometimes they may be developing something (like 5.3.3.3) which works better as a 'dev' build than an official build.

Also, why is it necessary to follow the HV version numbers? And why only the last two numbers? (if HV ever gets to 1.0.0 it will break the naming system as 0.0.0.0 and 1.0.0.0.0 are both lower versions then 9.9.0.0

You can use 10.0.0.0 when HV goes to 1.0.0.
The extra merit is that most of the time HV STAT requires some fix after patches. This way the update (related to HV updates) can be better addressed.

Okay, I was able to install v4.3.3 due to the old thread. I have no idea how to properly update it to v5.4.0, though. The way to get HV STAT in Greasemonkey only gets you v4.3.3, since the script hasn't been updated there since October 10, 2011. Will it ever be updated there again? Downloading the zip here gets me some files that exist in v4.3.3 as well, but some files don't. To be clear, HVSTAT 5.4.0.crx and hv_statistics_tracking_a.user.js are new files, while v4.3.3 only has [six_digit_number].user.js (and three files common to both versions). There's also no "Firefox" folder in v4.3.3 (as installed via Greasemonkey). If I replace just the three shared files the displayed version number doesn't change (although the icon does) and I don't seem to gain any new settings. I have no idea what to do with the new files. If there's a proper way to update HV STAT can you tell me and/or update the "stable" thread? The zip has no installer and there are apparently no instructions for it, so it's opaque to me.

EDIT: Okay, so you drag hv_statistics_tracking_a.user.js into Firefox AFTER installing v4.3.3 (although the icon didn't change this time, and I still have no idea what the deal is with HVSTAT 5.4.0.crx, which isn't copied). Sorry to bother anyone!

This post has been edited by oohay: Jul 26 2012, 14:01

Thanks again for the hard work !

Okay, I was able to install v4.3.3 due to the old thread. I have no idea how to properly update it to v5.4.0, though. The way to get HV STAT in Greasemonkey only gets you v4.3.3, since the script hasn't been updated there since October 10, 2011. Will it ever be updated there again? Downloading the zip here gets me some files that exist in v4.3.3 as well, but some files don't. To be clear, HVSTAT 5.4.0.crx and hv_statistics_tracking_a.user.js are new files, while v4.3.3 only has [six_digit_number].user.js (and three files common to both versions). There's also no "Firefox" folder in v4.3.3 (as installed via Greasemonkey). If I replace just the three shared files the displayed version number doesn't change (although the icon does) and I don't seem to gain any new settings. I have no idea what to do with the new files. If there's a proper way to update HV STAT can you tell me and/or update the "stable" thread? The zip has no installer and there are apparently no instructions for it, so it's opaque to me.

EDIT: Okay, so you drag hv_statistics_tracking_a.user.js into Firefox AFTER installing v4.3.3 (although the icon didn't change this time, and I still have no idea what the deal is with HVSTAT 5.4.0.crx, which isn't copied). Sorry to bother anyone!

the .CRX is a chrome extension, so it won't work with firefox.

I recommend getting chrome, even if you want to use Firefox as your primary browser, then just use chrome for playing HV.
Chrome is a fair bit faster (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Found (maybe) another problem. In the "shrine", hitting space, to change multiple artifacts, doesn't work anymore (chrome 5.4.0 & 5.3.x)

Found (maybe) another problem. In the "shrine", hitting space, to change multiple artifacts, doesn't work anymore (chrome 5.4.0 & 5.3.x)

That shrining thing is from official HV. And that multiple shrining has never worked on chrome.

- Replaced operator '!=' and '==' with '!==' and '===' to avoid implicit type conversion.

I was personally very happy with this update.
It introduced a couple of bugs due to previous lazy coding but they're easy enough to fix.
Thanks again.

As I appreciate you guys' work, you are also making the whole project as chaoic as ever.

1. I do think most people would like to have 1 patch in 2-3 weeks which contains several updates rather than 14 patches everyone which contains a bit of improvement. Just see how many patches you guys have posted in the last few days.
Just don't rush to name every update first: test it among yourselves, see if there's any problems, then publish that in a package. This has become a collaborated work, so please make it work like a collaborated work instead of several individual small improvements made by separate people.

As Ilirith said, people don't have to update everytime. I'd probably recommend waiting for a 1.1.* release (under the current version sys we've been using).
From now on though, I'll include a stable and bleeding edge release in the main post.
For us making the project chaotic, we're attempting to organize things by discussing changes, opening a GIT repo etc, but the problem lies with who has/wants access.
Not everyone wants to work in a team.

2. Naming:
Most people don't even remember the 'major milestone' from v.4.0 and v.5.0. It's better if you guys naming as
1st and 2nd: Follow the major HV version (0.6.9 -> 6.9)
3rd: new feature packs
4th: bug fix/dev build
It should work better as people will then understand if their version matches the latest HV patch.

I would rather use mrttao's system of [MajorMilestones.Features.Fixes.MinorFixes].
What I can do though, is include a tag in the main post with which version of HV we're currently compatible with.

3. A better way to explain what you have changed. Why do you guys need to ask the others every time something has changed?
Please remember, it's a program for players to use, not to confuse them.

On The Developer Side:
On the GIT I'm trying to be as descriptive as possible when updating but sometimes it's impossible to describe EXACTLY what's been changed, especially in larger updates.
As long as the commit isn't huge, you can see what's been changed in the diff.
Eventually I'd like to see comments in the code, ATM the code is as chaotic as we are.

On The User Side:
I agree but what would you suggest we do. We could announce only features being added and bugs being fixed and dumb some things down but that would leave dev's out of the loop (excl those with GIT access).


This post has been edited by GaryMcNabb: Jul 26 2012, 21:50

Sometimes this happen, I am currently using 5.3.3.1. It also happened in 5.2.2, in that it caused the scan/skill buttons not to show. I have unsuccessfully tried to find out why, but that part of the code makes my brain hurt (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/sad.gif)

Yea, i've had that happen too a few times... oddly enough, it seemed to not fix itself by just clicking the battle button in the menu, so it might be caused by a specific monster.. so next time it happens, please note down which enemies you are facing =)

Try version [github.com] 5.4.0.1.

It looks like an incomplete scan or something, but I can't be sure.
If it happens again, can you please enable "Show monster statistics on mouseover" and take a screenshot for me?

Sometimes this happen, I am currently using 5.3.3.1. It also happened in 5.2.2, in that it caused the scan/skill buttons not to show. I have unsuccessfully tried to find out why, but that part of the code makes my brain hurt (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/sad.gif)

there is an option called "Save skill types (elements) while used in battle (data updated on scan and outside of battle)"
I believe this is what you get when a monster was never scanned, but has had data collected on its attack type (which can be displayed)
As you can see, it doesn't know what the weaknesses, volnerabilities, class, or PL are. But it does know the attack type of that monster.

Also, I noticed that new monsters no longer display NEW, instead they are showing up as "0" or "-" for the class, I don't quite remember which (only saw a couple. I have enabled the feature to show monster PL but I have also updated to 5.4 at the same time). The rest as like your image, 0+ for PL, 0 and 0 for the weaknesses and resistances.
I am having a hard time finding more info because I very very rarely encounter an unscanned monster anymore.

PS. I think the NEW tag should be red to draw attention to it.

This post has been edited by mrttao: Jul 27 2012, 03:48

there is an option called "Save skill types (elements) while used in battle (data updated on scan and outside of battle)"

I believe this is what you get when a monster was never scanned, but has had data collected on its attack type (which can be displayed)

Also, I noticed that new monsters no longer display NEW, instead they are showing up as "0" or "-" for the class, I don't quite remember which (only saw a couple. I have enabled the feature to show monster PL but I have also updated to 5.4 at the same time). The rest as like your image, 0+ for PL, 0 and 0 for the weaknesses and resistances.
I am having a hard time finding more info because I very very rarely encounter an unscanned monster anymore.

That was fixed in version 5.4.0.1.
I had to change
if (mclass !== 0)
to
if (mclass !== "0")
Because mclass is a string for some reason :/