L2J Server

Ok i mostly leach from l2j and if you ask for my shares it will be 2-3 the most... without counting web templates.
But im trying to help the community as i can when i can with my lack of knowledge and as far as i have guides or someone to help! i do thingks for this community. so after so many years i see some inactivity but this isn't the problem.... my problem is with other projects... i see 232423432 other interlude / freya/ h5 open source projects rising.... even with payed support or free support.. and i wanna say...
" guys are you serius??? you come here you learn java .. you take free files and after you host your own project and leave this community ??? wtf?? go to hell!!!!! you are just noobs who wanna the glory for yourself and the only thing you do is too slow down progresh specially becouse this projects close after some time becouse of noob administrators.....
i don't you realy should thing that is better to work all in one forum and svn than create separate projects...
i thing this ppls as stealers... but anyway i not even know why im writing all this but i think i am right..


P.S
Thanks all l2j members for their support the past years and for keeping this community alive!

best regards,


P.S
All leechers who start your own projects... ok guys maybe your are gods of java or something... but screw you!

It's not entirely community's fault. I might even say, it's more L2J's dev's fault than the leechers

- stuff posted on forums are in 90% ignored and not commited even to beta for tests (also in most cases they're not tested by anyone...)
- dev's change huge parts of code like at least once/month, not leaving any kind of backwards compatibility, or even worse (eg. db -> xml's rework - not improved gameserver in any case... well mby improved gs startup time by 2s... or other, like incomming soon skills engine rework, that will force all who use own custom skills or scripts operating on skills, to rewrite tons of xmls, .java quests or handlers etc...)
- the one above means that if you dont wanna waste a lot of time, to do what you already did, many times (rework working parts, to work again, after consecutive eg. core reworks), you are forced to use clean l2j code only
- additionally, instead of work on fixing problems that exist since like forever, devs prefer most often to change, rework, remove, move, rename etc. parts that are ok (or only missing some small parts)
- most current devs have own forks (or gameservers) and it's not very cost-effective for them, to share things to public (but hell, Im not gonna do that eather too often ) also whatever you write, you have to rewrite again cause of often reworks in l2j (with no backwards compatibility of any kind)

Szponiasty wrote:stuff posted on forums are in 90% ignored and not commited even to beta for tests (also in most cases they're not tested by anyone...)

Not true. The current team has the highest rate of commits from community, 2 years ago you could have said that 90% wasn't committed.

About backward compatibility, well I think that part of the idea of reworking something is to improve it and in most cases backward compatibility means hold on on something that wasn't entirely right.

Szponiasty wrote:additionally, instead of work on fixing problems that exist since like forever, devs prefer most often to change, rework, remove, move, rename etc. parts that are ok (or only missing some small parts)

We have fixed hundred of things, have you fixed something lately?

@Szponiasty you always have tried to point out what "devs" don't do or do wrong, there are many users like that, and when they share something and gets rejected/ignored they start in a rage of attacks against devs that takes no where, if you really want to change/improve the project keep sharing, and working, become a developer and then do things your way, lead by example

We aren't inactive, we are working on a huge rework like Szponiasty said, but is not to screw your gameservers and force you to work for hours to make your custom work, is because we (active devs in team) belive that it'll be better, so if you have to rewrite something, think that is the minimum cost for getting someone else free work based in experience and good intentions.

Anyway this time of the year is complicated, mostly means exams, huge amount of (real life) work, holydays, etc.

@gmakhs no worry about what others do, beside there are some forks and non-forks out there that do great job, there is a wrong idea about forks being evil, mostly the root of a fork is that it doesn't share main project development guidelines, that divides effort instead of improve the project , the other are for example main project doesn't care about forks while doing reworks, and you can count with the fingers of the hand the forks that come back here to share a fix, there are more problems in both ways; not given credits, taken ideas, etc...

I don't get the reason for this, but the fact is - every fork is made because they want to change something, and they can't do it in this community, and YOU can't blame them for doing it.

@Zoey76 - you can't put anything against these complaints because it is obvious that l2j is dying, there are many forks out there that are doing many times better and have many times more active developers than l2j.
Also, it should not require ALL of the dev team to do one rework. If fact, that can actually mess up and slow down the rework process.

Anyway, I'm not complaining (it's pointless anyway), but neither of you is right; the forks are not bad (well, not all of them at the very least, some of them are better than l2j for sure), but l2j is not very good either.

P.S You might have fixed a hundred of bugs, but you have also made other bugs in place of the old ones and even broken some stuff that used to work (people are complaining, you know?).

jurchiks wrote:Anyway, I'm not complaining (it's pointless anyway), but neither of you is right; the forks are not bad (well, not all of them at the very least, some of them are better than l2j for sure), but l2j is not very good either.

I already stated that there are good forks with good developers out there.

jurchiks wrote:P.S You might have fixed a hundred of bugs, but you have also made other bugs in place of the old ones and even broken some stuff that used to work (people are complaining, you know?).

There are two things broken at the moment, Heal skills (and related to those changesets) and the implementation of Trove4J in some places.

We know about this and we are working to fix it, people is free to complaint, but that won't help anyone code better stuff
Is different if someone report and other test the proposed fixes, so to all of those who complaint how many time have they actually tested a bug fix?

Be realistic guys, if you don't help you don't have the right to ask for help.

@jurchiks you keep saying that is pointless talk to devs, why do you even bother to post?

@Zoey76 - only 1/4th of my post was aimed at you.
Also, you don't actually think that those are the only 2 bugs/broken stuff in existence, do you?

jurchiks wrote:@Zoey76 - only 1/4th of my post was aimed at you.
Also, you don't actually think that those are the only 2 bugs/broken stuff in existence, do you?

I think those make the game unplayable and/or server unstable.

If you know any other major bug post it.

I'm not talking about only the major bugs, but there are probably more of those too.
The bug report section could use an eagle's eye once in a while...
Also, you should close the topics which report bugs already fixed. Or move them to a separate forum section ("fixed bugs" or smth like that)

My two cents,

jurchiks wrote:you can't put anything against these complaints because it is obvious that l2j is dying, there are many forks out there that are doing many times better and have many times more active developers than l2j.

I would like to know these forks many times better. Where are you from? Mars?

jurchiks wrote:Also, it should not require ALL of the dev team to do one rework. If fact, that can actually mess up and slow down the rework process.

Time for the Project Manager side. I'm really sure the L2j dev team are enough skilled to know where/when/what need to do each time. I have my own opinion about their work like you, but all of these opinions are okay, including their opinion.

jurchiks wrote:Anyway, I'm not complaining (it's pointless anyway), but neither of you is right; the forks are not bad (well, not all of them at the very least, some of them are better than l2j for sure), but l2j is not very good either.

You always are complaining guy, since I'm here. You are a great coder, with much knowledge, and "bold" I'm always learning of you "/bold", but any reason you are always angry with this community. Will laugh of me, but also make me sad read the same pvp-threads each day since three years ago.

jurchiks wrote:P.S You might have fixed a hundred of bugs, but you have also made other bugs in place of the old ones and even broken some stuff that used to work (people are complaining, you know?).

These guys are working day to day in the unstable branch, I will add with many effort and not much support. Probably you didn't knew but is unstable.

L2j is dying to you, but not for me and much others. And you are free to choose any fork of these from Mars.

jurchiks wrote:there are many forks out there that are doing many times better and have many times more active developers than l2j.

everyone know that there are some Forks that have more features done (custom in most of the cases), and these Forks only work for themselves (selfish attitude may be, but allowed by GPL) and never share his project work, except when some of the devs decide to leak some part of the project , you can see some of these leaks in MaxCheaters forum.

and here in L2J we work for all (without exceptions), thats the difference.

jurchiks wrote:Also, you should close the topics which report bugs already fixed. Or move them to a separate forum section ("fixed bugs" or smth like that)

we already requested that long time ago (to Phoenix), but no sense to have two areas for bug reports.

so the options are two:

1 - Leave "Bug Reports Area" & "Add SubForum for Fixed Bug Reports" in forum, and delete "Trac Report System".
2 - Delete forum "Bug Reports Area" and leave only "Trac Report System".

How open is it for discussion if i suggest moving the project from svn to git ? Git model especially in github with pull request system is much better for encouraging people to contribute since its a bit more anonymous than svn. In git all i have to do is fork the project, add some things and request a pull from my fork to the main repository. Those that have worked with git should know clearly how better it is than svn.

Without any reason for trolling or opening up a flame on svn vs git , centralized vs distirbuted , i would like a feedback here from someone in the core.

Bug report forum is intented as a " discuss" area for the bugs reported on Trac (as explained on the forum description)

Switching to Git over SVN is pointless, there are no mayor benefits rather than the distributed repositories, also even if you fork and request a pull, it doesnt mean it will be approved into the main repo.

Switching svn to git is far from pointless. Dont forget the reason why git was wrote. (Cause as Torvalds said, svn sucks ).

Besides that, git redefines the idea of open source. An open source project's philosophy in git is that the project itself does not exist in one place but is forked in different places. Users needs define the direction a project should and will take. If requests from a popular fork dont get pulled in the main repository, then that fork validates its existance by satisfying the needs of a considerable amount of people.

Forking in git is not evil, but purification. Everyone shares wtih everyone and everyone takes from everyone what he likes in his fork. In git, l2j is not 15 developers and 100 guys requesting changes. In git, l2j is us. Me, my friends, you and everyone else.

I dont know if you have been active in git/github but anyone that has , will agree with me. Believe me, what you perceive as open source in svn, is a millenia away from what you perceive as open source in github

In sum:

I'll be honest and it may sound harsh, but better being honest than elusive. There is a group of people who capitalize l2j and give a direction to it. I do respect everyone's opinion and belief in taking a specific direction. But what i don't like at all, is that inorder to be part of l2j, you have to follow that specific direction. If you differ from that you wont be part of l2j. And as if this wasnt enough, there is a tendency to try to "cast away" those that fork the project because they have a different belief. Suddenly everyone that forks l2j to follow his way is the bad guy. This is not the spirit of open source. And if the core doesnt realize it, i feel sorry for them. If they do but insist on using the model they use all this time, i feel even more sorry.

If people prefer forks instead of the main project, thats because it doesnt satisfy their needs. Treating that is not done by casting away all the forkers as outlaws but giving a more open spirit to the project.

GIT can be private too, so at the end is the same.

one bad thing, is that GIT is still not user friendly at GUI side tools, as SVN is.

you can notice that we still have some community users that don't know how use SVN properly, so you can imagine the problem them could have using GIT xD

few months ago, I ported whole L2J Project to GITHUB to give a try, and after few days I notice that interface is not really good, even using EGit, so I switched back to assembla :/

Custom or not - better than nothing (lets look on "Hellbound" implementation in L2J - it's still not implemented for so many years. I'm not counting beta branch - nobody uses it on live server = not implemented). It might be custom but can be commited and eg. disabled by default. If there is any part in (even custom), then there is a chance that someone will wanna do some small work to make it less custom. And in time there will be fully retail like feature in. Instead there were like 30 different versions, all different. Now for example, lets look on other similar stuff, for that lots of different more or less custom implementations were commited on this forums, some like 2 years ago. Eg. Kratei's Cube. How long will it take and what will it require, to any implementation of that, or Undergorun Coliseum, or other shit, be commited into at least beta? 2, 3 years? Waiting until someone post 100% retail like, fully finished, debugged and working version, ready to commit to svn with one click? Who will do that, and why? To give own work to be freely copied amongst 1k free servers? Lets be straight and say out loud something that everybody knows well, but is afraid to say: 90 if not 99% of free servers based on L2J, are to make money for the person that decided to setup such server for public. It's not in such person interest, to share something that other servers don't have, but he does. Even if the world would be perfect, and everyone would give back same amount of work, that they took from base (L2J)... damn. I forgot what I was going to say. Anyway - IRC logs, cause I'm sure Im just repeating what was said many times in the past...

(also look at the community - most posts concern problems that average pc user can solve, not to mention dev. So don't expect full features to be suddenly posted cause most people here have problems with properly configuring jvm to run clean gameserver, not to mention coding or fixing anything by themselves...)

Anyway I (and many, many other people) was saying that for long time / or whining about it from time to time on IRC. Thats also another huge L2J problem and one of main causes for this project to be so slow and far behind ALL forks.

To sum up:
- all is denied (cause custom)
- if not denied, then ignored (not tested, not commited to beta to be tested etc...)
- often, sudden, not announced changes, reworks etc, that - except for few ppl that are l2j devs or close to them - noone else is expecting (and force any code he did, to be changed only to be back compatible with clean l2j. latelty at min. once/month rate...)

Not that I'm in any way against any work, that dev's do. Just stating obvious facts that are problem of most open source projects, in comparision to corporate team work model, that is directed on simple cost-effectivenes, not idealistic beliefs