L2J Server

Yes a lot of things are not tested but anything I have posted has been 100% retail and is not added to the timeline one of the reason why I don't post things now and I always test and check over all my work

lion wrote:woot?
all commit tested by devs and on devs server.. lol

Well.. almost all

actually they mostly had old revisions cause they were too much afraid to update xDD as it turns out, this decision was correct

If L2j Server open server on which will add new things for testing .It can make more faster team work..
But problem are only money for paying server hosting

ThePhoenixBird wrote:How to get a Forum Contribution Commited:

• Clean Coding, make it easy to read.
• Do not HARDcode your stuff, while less code you use the better.

Sorry, if I sound like a troll, but this times you are a troll on L2j forum, when you don't comply to devs opinion.

If whole L2j would be clean coded, there wouldn't be bugs like this viewtopic.php?f=81&t=20154 , that are really easy to fix (or better which should never occur, when you think about thread-safety before commiting smth - btw: This is not the only occurence of non-thread-safe iterating, look at CharEffectList for example). Seriously, a lot of the commits from L2j devs are not even clean coded. Run a code analyzer and you will see about 230 code parts with more than 25 lines, that are just copy & paste. THAT ís definetly no clean coding.

I contribute a lot to open source projects, and i did also a few large things for L2j in the past (friendlist rework for example - look at old forums), but open source development includes the community. In L2j it is like: Devs commit, Community contributes (but noone cares - if someone cares the contrib is slightly rewritten and no credits are given). And no, this is no false allegation, but it happened a few times that code parts where not touched for years, though they didn't work, but short after a contrib the code was rewritten nearly the same was as the contrib was, but there was not even a "thanks for the reminder xyz" or smth like that. Sorry, but that's not the way it should be.

IMHO your attitude and behaviour against other people do the rest. The open letter to non-friendly forks is a joke, but i will not discuss this again. Do you really think it helps when some L2j devs come to IRC channels of forks or other servers just to bitch around? Another thing is the teamwork with the forks - it could be A LOT better, but that's what you don't tell people here on L2j. I know of at least 2 forks (1 for sure) that really tried to work together with L2j, but the basic answer was "you can give us code/information, but you will not get anything from us (before public release). if you aren't ok with this just gtfo". And after that, there came this open letter, which was basically a punch in the face for ALL forks.

But enough for now. It's christmas This is just my opinion. If you don't like it, delete it (or edit it, like you did with a few of my recent posts - without a note, that it was edited). I know that I'm not alone with that oppinion and if you continue to ignore everything the community says, it'll be the end of L2j (you gave proof for that by yourself, because contrib rate dropped a lot in the last months).

Honestly on some days i think: "When will L2j forum be renamed to L2inc forum and is closed development then?"

honestly i cant wait when *fork* will change thier name to *fork*...
Happy Christmas

Tan wrote:honestly i cant wait when *fork* will change thier name to *fork*...
Happy Christmas

[OFFTOPIC]We will once we are not Years ahead in performance, features and Closer to retail .[/OFFTOPIC]

And not sure why you are attacking us, he was just stating some obvious things. Look at jurchiks he has tried to commit things and not even a reply to him. Not only him there are many more.

ThePhoenixBird wrote:Would someone start a list about missing\incomplete\bugged features since C1?

I have such a list but after Tans last remark I don't think I want to share.
p.s it is really detailed.

Evilus wrote:

Tan wrote:honestly i cant wait when *fork* will change thier name to *fork*...
Happy Christmas

[OFFTOPIC]We will once we are not Years ahead in performance, features and Closer to retail.[/OFFTOPIC]

And not sure why you are attacking us, he was just stating some obvious things. Look at jurchiks he has tried to commit things and not even a reply to him. Not only him there are many more.

LOL yeah

Years passed, but *fork* members still not understand anything and only produce constant bitching.

_DS_ wrote:Years passed, but *fork* members still not understand anything and only produce constant bitching.

Then please explain what we do not understand. And that's what i meant with my initial sentence. Did i attack someone personally? No! Does L2j devs attack people personally? Yes and that in a very ugly way (I don't want to post logs, because i think they are not suitable for minors, but if you want them i have no problem with sending it to you).
Question is why *fork* tried a few times to establish some kind of teamwork with L2j, but was always blocked. I have no problem with it. If you don't want help, i don't care. But i care if our project is treated as "unfriendly fork" and constantly bitched at this forum here, because L2j devs are too jelious to accept any kind of help.
You want respect for your work, we want respect for our work. That's quite simple. But it doesn't show respect when you remove credits from our contribs or edit our posts.

Tan wrote:LOL yeah

Very good answer ...

bullshit posted = bullshit locked...

P.S. According InC...lol...no matter of you coding skills, youre an idiot benurb

You see l2j dev team as smth solid. This is wrong.
And what respect you want while running closed source project, contribute nothing from it ? You just constantly leech user's contribs from this forum (this is why most work was moved to the advanced subforum), also pretend to be best super-duper-mega-java-server in the world (exactly like inc ok, skipping this part ).

BTW, we can send you some spare RAMs, 512M should be enough.

Evilus wrote: [OFFTOPIC]We will once we are not Years ahead in performance, features and Closer to retail .[/OFFTOPIC]

You gotta be kidding... You seriously believe that you are years ahead of L2j? When was the last time you've taken a close look at L2j sources, 4years ago?

Let's get this straight:
1) Your thing AKA fork wouldn't even exist if L2j wasn't around.
2) Renaming classes/packages here and there in the core does not mean in any way you've rewritten most of the emulator.
3) Claiming you're years ahead of L2j while you're still running Epilogue made me fucking laugh heavy.
4) Claiming you've completely split-out of L2j on your homepage, and no longer synchronize with it because "L2j is badly written" made me piss in my pants when I've seen the "*fork*" Leaks.

@benurb:
Why did you have to mention InC? Is it any different than *fork*? No. We're both private forks. At the exception we don't think we're the butt-hole of the planet by claiming we're by far better than the emulator we're based on.

Oh... and.. Merry Christmas!

Requesting open topic, this is not fair