"Dclient/Dserver"
 

Well,

I had a request from a few people for a program like DServer/DClient. I was thinking about making my own version and using it as a Third Party tool for graal (allgraal.com?). Here's what I was thinking

DServer - Windows and Linux (Linux prolly after windows).
Dclient - Windows and Linux.

Features:
FTP where one user can take ownership of a file to make chances to it then return the status to "Not Owned". That makes it easy to tell what people are working on and so you dont overwrite peoples work. Of course admins have total control...

Chat- Just a chat room.

Forums - Built in forum. Not much to say there ^^.

Any other suggestions?

This will be free for anyone to use at any time. I will give source to Stefan and Unixmad of course... I would love some input on this and what features you would like to see.

Server will be C++. Client will be Delphi or C++.



:cool: :D

:( too many bad memories.

Hrm, I'm a bit confused. Is this a hybrid of Geeshurbur? I'm not understanding if this will be it's own network not connected to graal but your site or something.

Re: "Dclient/Dserver"
 

Sounds good.

Sounds fine. D(Server|Client) had a built in, 'multiplayer', drawing board thingie. Can you make that too? :)

No GPL?

Amazing how this comes right after Soulblade and Jagen have started making one with the new engine =/
---Shifter

She was already talking about it before, Soul and I don't know when she will be finished and we didn't even know when she would start on it, so we started making it since for one, we expect to update it frequently, so we decided to try making it with the new engine. (Also: angel wasn't aware of soul and I working on it so don't bother acusing her of 'stealing' the idea)

Didn't say she was stealing it. Thanks for clearing it up.
---Shifter

HAH, someone just made an ass of theirself. :cool:

Implication is about as good as saying something.

Implication is subject to interpretation. If the majority believes it was an intentional implication - ie most people think "I did not have sexual relations with Miss Monica Lewinsky" implies he didn't get any favors either, thus it was implied. If only you read "Hey, I was working on something like that too, cool" as "HEY YOU, THAT WAS MY IDEA!", then it's not as good as saying it - you're just wrong and need to take deeper breaths.

Which is the case remains to be seen; I can't speak for the majority.

That should be scripted in Graal script, otherwise it's the wrong forum for this. Jagen is already working on this I think

I'd imagine a Gscript version would have less problems, using the graal script to preform graal functions.

Jagen AND Soul Blade -_-. Oh well, I will let jagen have it. He is currently doing most of the scripting anyway x-x.

Sorry I forgot x-x

One word: Graalnet Snooper

Players can log onto this snooper with
their graal account/password and it will
log them onto a 'Lobby' where they can talk
to other players. They can click on the
Playerworld button to show a list of the playerwords.
They can enter a playerworld, but they would only
be shown as 'name' (Snooper) and have an
icon that snoopers get, say, an eyeball.
They can send PMs and chat with other snoopers.

:D

the graal messenger that Nova is making will allow you to send pms to in-game people even though your not playing methinks

Might as well be Angel's project by what I've heard.

Are you implying that I had sexual relations with that Dserver?

...Excuse my ignorance, but what the hell is a Dserver?

Aye, Direct Connect... Angel I can see it being a good idea but to much "*****s" would be asking to much questions and others would have illigal things hosted. Ya and you know where that goes...

I kind of doubt that =/ unless he has the protocol the gserver uses it would be really hard to make that...

anti-hax code build in. :)

^-- Same Question --^

From what I've head, its some sort of advanced RC.

True, but the whole point of implication is that there is an intended meaning. People can be wrong about it, but it exists nonetheless. Even if we discard this and rely on estimation, it doesn't mean that the majority decides anything.

In this case, ProjectShifter's use of the '=/' emoticon makes it clear that he was making the observation in a disgruntled mood, and implying that there was something wrong with Angel's actions.

But this implied meaning is subject to interpretation. You can't say "When you closed that door, you implied all african-americans love kool-aid!"; while you can infer that, it's not explicitly implied. (I was implying that it's cold and I don't want moths in my house - how you got kool aid out of that is quite beyond me!) In fact that's a contradiction in terms, practically (but not quite on a technicality) an oxy***** - you can't explicitly imply, which is to say something implicitly. So it boils down to: Did most people infer the same thing? In that case, something was certainly implied, whether it was intended or not. Did only one or two people infer the same thing, or loosely related things? In that case nothing was implied so much as inferred; you got more out of it than was actually there by virtue of nobody else saw it. Majority rule is the only stable way to adjudicate implication.

You can infer something freely. You can't tell someone they implied something though unless pretty much everyone's getting that same inferrance. Even if you determine it was implied, you still don't have intention; they might not have meant to signal your opinion's unimportant by folding their arms and yawning, but they did so accidentally.

Of course it is, but only because we don't have access to the mind of the person who implied it. There is a correct meaning, and it's not defined by us.

I'm not saying otherwise. I'm not saying that an implication can only be interpreted a single way or that any given action has a meaning baked into it. I'm saying that if somebody makes an intentional implication then there exists a correct way of interpreting that, even if the original implication was sloppy and tenuous.

Well, now we're talking about different things. Since the situation is this case revolves around an intentional implication, I'm limiting my side of the debate to that.

If I mention that I'm getting hungry then I am implying that we find a donut shop. That's absolute fact; in line with the dictionary definition, I 'expressed or indicated indirectly'. It's something that I did, with a clear and immutable meaning in my mind. If you did a little poll then maybe 100% of three hundred thousand people would decide that I was actually implying that I am about to die of starvation, and want to get to a lawyer so I can compose my will. That doesn't mean I was implying any such thing, it just means that the voters were wrong.

So, words and actions have ambiguous meanings, but people do not. There's no way for a single person to definitively identify a sentence's implied meanings but he can guess and strike upon a person's intentions in using that sentence. In the case of people, it's not a 'majority rules' situation. The people who best understand the language and the speaker have the best chance of identifying the correct meaning, but even the flip of a coin can lead to success.

Man you guys take forever to post. DServer would be cool from what it sounds. The main thing that I really want is a decent upload limit. I mean I can't even upload my tileset. -.-

Ah here it is,
well I guess that means you'd pm graal players... *scratches head* I know it was suggested way back when while the idea was still infant

Yeah, but I doubt that will happen unless Angel does it for Nova.

That's if angel knows the protocol :O

Seems like Angel has a lot on her plate + co-managing G2k1
I don't think all these projects actually rely on her, Jagen can get it done himself easily whereas Nova i don't know very well but by reputation it might not be completed to a point where he wants to release it for public use.

Any time Nova starts a project, he always ends up trying to get Angel to do it for him.

Very true. The new engine is more than likely best for this. It can access internal features of the graal engine :).and I do have too much work as it is :P

I've still got that old program, wow.

Why not just use the old one?

Um, you weren't aware of the problems? Dclient would suck up every single system resource you had till you had none left, I left it on all night once and I came back and I had 1% of RAM left. Also the Dserver runs on windows using a special microsoft access DB thing, and I couldn't get either from Stefan because he either doesn't have it or doesn't want to send

Ah, I didn't realize. I only used it for short periods of time, so it never made much of an impact.