English Amiga Board Amiga Lore


Go Back   English Amiga Board > Other Projects > project.TOSEC (amiga only)

 
 
Thread Tools
Old 20 June 2017, 00:53   #41
DamienD
Global Moderator

DamienD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: London / Sydney
Age: 40
Posts: 8,778
See this thread TOSEC guys: Hyper Warp
...added, Crashdisk

Last edited by Crashdisk; 28 June 2017 at 16:47.
DamienD is offline  
AdSense AdSense  
Old 27 June 2017, 21:46   #42
DamienD
Global Moderator

DamienD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: London / Sydney
Age: 40
Posts: 8,778
Another game that doesn't seem to be in TOSEC is: KIN

File renamed appropriately and now in The Zone! courtesy of Gamebase Amiga
DamienD is offline  
Old 28 June 2017, 17:39   #43
Crashdisk
Moderator

Crashdisk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: France
Age: 40
Posts: 1,219
Quote:
Originally Posted by DamienD View Post
Another game that doesn't seem to be in TOSEC is: KIN

File renamed appropriately and now in The Zone! courtesy of Gamebase Amiga
The game is already in TOSEC:
- TMF Compact 37 (19xx)(The Magnum Force)
- Mini Executeable Game Disk #2 (1989)(Bamiga Sector One - Cybertech)
and may be soon:
- Associate & Aztec Warrior & Kin & Miami Mice (19xx)(Quartex)
Crashdisk is offline  
Old 28 June 2017, 18:24   #44
DamienD
Global Moderator

DamienD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: London / Sydney
Age: 40
Posts: 8,778
Ok, but these are compilation disk.

The one in The Zone! is a single game disk.

...btw it wasn't created by me; as mentioned I found it in Gamebase Amiga.
DamienD is offline  
Old 28 June 2017, 19:04   #45
Crashdisk
Moderator

Crashdisk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: France
Age: 40
Posts: 1,219
Quote:
Originally Posted by DamienD View Post
Ok, but these are compilation disk.

The one in The Zone! is a single game disk.

...btw it wasn't created by me; as mentioned I found it in Gamebase Amiga.
This disk was created for the needs of Gamebase. That's not exactly what I'm looking for...
Crashdisk is offline  
Old 28 June 2017, 19:37   #46
DamienD
Global Moderator

DamienD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: London / Sydney
Age: 40
Posts: 8,778
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crashdisk View Post
This disk was created for the needs of Gamebase.
???

So what if the disk was made for the needs of Gamebase; what difference does that make?

All the compilation disks you've listed that supposedly have "KIN" on them (but no way to actually tell from the names) were made specifically and not original...

This .ADF is out in the wild, probably being used by a great number of people; therefore shouldn't it be catalogued in TOSEC?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crashdisk View Post
That's not exactly what I'm looking for...
Here's the problem. What does that mean; "not exactly what I'm looking for"? So, what is it exactly that you're looking for then?

It's a constant battle with you guys trying to work out what type of disks one should submit and which will possibly be allowed or rejected.

I haven't seen any set rules / regulations / guidelines...

One minute something is ok and then the next it changes without any explanation. We need consistency guys
DamienD is offline  
Old 28 June 2017, 20:22   #47
idrougge
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 2,917
Quote:
Originally Posted by DamienD View Post
All the compilation disks you've listed that supposedly have "KIN" on them (but no way to actually tell from the names) were made specifically and not original...

This .ADF is out in the wild, probably being used by a great number of people; therefore shouldn't it be catalogued in TOSEC?
I agree. If the disk is easily found, it should be catalogued. And noted as a pirate copy or hack or just [gamebase].

And the compilations should note what's on them.
idrougge is offline  
Old 28 June 2017, 20:43   #48
Crashdisk
Moderator

Crashdisk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: France
Age: 40
Posts: 1,219
I will try to clarify my choices (this is my point of view, not necessarily that of the other members of the team) :
- I hate to use flag [a] (look "1st Division Manager (1992)(Codemasters)[cr NMS]" set by example)
- I hate deleting files from the database
- With equal content, I prefer to integrate a disk of the 80/90 years rather than a recently rebuilt
- We can have dozens of different disks with identical content, in any case functionally (bamcopy doscopy, highscore, .fastdir, creation date, rebuilt, etc). Should we all integrate them? I do not want to!

Therefore, when I have to integrate a program of 1990, I do not spontaneously add a disk made in 2008. I will look for alternatives that come close to the original date. If I did not have this requirement, we could create the disks ourselves!

In summary, I do not say it will not be integrated (Gamebase version) but I will look for alternatives before ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by idrougge View Post
And the compilations should note what's on them.
This would not always be possible because of the limitations on the length of filenames

Last edited by Crashdisk; 28 June 2017 at 20:48.
Crashdisk is offline  
Old 28 June 2017, 21:55   #49
DamienD
Global Moderator

DamienD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: London / Sydney
Age: 40
Posts: 8,778
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crashdisk View Post
I will try to clarify my choices (this is my point of view, not necessarily that of the other members of the team)
Again the word "consistency" comes to mind. Surely as part of "the TOSEC team" you need to follow the exact same rules / regulations / procedures / guidelines, blah, blah, blah agreed upon or what's the point?

You can't have one member doing things one way and then another doing something completely different.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crashdisk View Post
- With equal content, I prefer to integrate a disk of the 80/90 years rather than a recently rebuilt
That doesn't make sense, back then sometimes people just slapped things together to get them out the door and into the "scene" quickly with dire consequences.

If a better / cleaner disk is created, no matter which year / decade, then surely this is a good thing?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crashdisk View Post
- We can have dozens of different disks with identical content, in any case functionally (bamcopy doscopy, highscore, .fastdir, creation date, rebuilt, etc). Should we all integrate them? I do not want to!
I'm sure the majority of TOSEC users agree with you on this point

...but no one has asked you to do it this way previously, it's how you guys have always done it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crashdisk View Post
Therefore, when I have to integrate a program of 1990, I do not spontaneously add a disk made in 2008. I will look for alternatives that come close to the original date. If I did not have this requirement, we could create the disks ourselves!
I'll retype part of what I mentioned above regarding this point; if a better / cleaner disk is created, no matter which year / decade then surely this is a good thing?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crashdisk View Post
In summary, I do not say it will not be integrated (Gamebase version) but I will look for alternatives before ...
Well you sort of did in my opinion.

As far as I'm aware there are no other stand-alone .ADFs for this game. We aren't talking about better alternatives, there are none at present. We also aren't talking about a dozen different disks with identical content but bamcopy, doscopy, highscore, .fastdir, creation date, rebuilt, etc...

Last edited by DamienD; 28 June 2017 at 22:00.
DamienD is offline  
Old 28 June 2017, 22:26   #50
idrougge
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 2,917
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crashdisk View Post
- We can have dozens of different disks with identical content, in any case functionally (bamcopy doscopy, highscore, .fastdir, creation date, rebuilt, etc). Should we all integrate them? I do not want to!
Yes. Doesn't mean you have to have them all on your hard drive. The checksums are enough.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crashdisk
This would not always be possible because of the limitations on the length of filenames
Of course not. But if there is room left, why not use it? Besides, the TOSEC DAT format isn't limited to what can be fit into filenames, is it?
idrougge is offline  
Old 29 June 2017, 18:07   #51
mai
Moderator
mai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Stendal/Germany
Age: 49
Posts: 4,513
My thinking matches with Crashdisk, althought, as previously said, both DamienD and Idrougge are right, TOSEC rules are clear, TOSEC catalouges all, and yes, i am not happy with this situation.
Anyway, at the end its Crashdisk his decision to add or not!
Do not call into question Crashdisk his job, he has to handle millions disk images.

Last edited by mai; 29 June 2017 at 18:23.
mai is offline  
Old 20 July 2017, 18:48   #52
onkelarie
Registered User

onkelarie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Spijkenisse / the Netherlands
Age: 47
Posts: 425
nice! I'm lazy as well in checking if there's a new DAT file, but what a nice suprise Lots of evenings are gonna be filled again with hunting and updating! The joy!
onkelarie is offline  
AdSense AdSense  
 


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
TOSEC Release (2016-01-03) mai project.TOSEC (amiga only) 16 18 April 2016 21:50
Upcoming TOSEC Release Cassiel project.TOSEC (amiga only) 14 16 September 2014 19:29
TOSEC Release (2014-02-28) Cassiel project.TOSEC (amiga only) 13 06 April 2014 21:20
New TOSEC Release (2011-11-11) Cassiel project.TOSEC (amiga only) 8 07 January 2012 00:00

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 04:13.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Page generated in 0.23743 seconds with 14 queries