PrBoom+ name bikeshedding

[Zeskofp]

Room

 

There's always a room to play some Doom.

[Ribbiks]

4 hours ago, Spectre01 said:

-longtics for -cl9 in @cybermind's port are certainly nice to have.

 

From a compatibility standpoint it does not make sense to allow prb+ to create demos that would crash Boom.exe in the case where the original port would otherwise have no problems with loading the wad. If Boom couldn't load the wad in the first place (due to the map itself violating some other limits of the port) then it's fair game maybe, but it seems straight wrong for the demo itself to be the source of the crash, defeats the purpose of what complevel 9 is supposed to be.

[Graf Zahl]

Agreed, but this can easily be handled by invalidating the demo the same way it is done for UMAPINFO.

Tying longtics to the complevel doesn't sound right, it should be a separate option.

 

[Ferk]

I'd vote for UBoom

[ReaperAA]

23 minutes ago, Ribbiks said:

 

From a compatibility standpoint it does not make sense to allow prb+ to create demos that would crash Boom.exe in the case where the original port would otherwise have no problems with loading the wad. If Boom couldn't load the wad in the first place (due to the map itself violating some other limits of the port) then it's fair game maybe, but it seems straight wrong for the demo itself to be the source of the crash, defeats the purpose of what complevel 9 is supposed to be.

 

I believe this is gonna go offtopic but how does vanilla doom and chocolate doom handle -longtic demos. If they cannot run -longtic demos, then doesn't that mean that PrBoom+ has already done something that defeats the purpose of a complevel (according to your opinion) 

Edited June 17, 2019 by ReaperAA

[Ribbiks]

19 minutes ago, ReaperAA said:

I believe this is gonna go offtopic but how does vanilla doom and chocolate doom handle -longtic demos. If they cannot run -longtic demos, then doesn't that mean that PrBoom+ has already done something that defeats the purpose of a complevel (according to your opinion) 

 

Vanilla crashes (unless you apply a patch to the exe). Chocolate, as far as I understand, has some auto-detection and will play back both short/longtics, perhaps begrudgingly. prb+ seems to employ similar methods for allowing you to record and playback longtics demos on cl2/3 if you really want to. Overall this seems to be a gray area. It "feels" wrong to me to allow longtics for cl2/3, but there is likely some community/historical context I'm missing here (like, at one point in time did a majority of demo recorders agree that vanilla ports should support longtics? Did a similar patch ever exist for Boom?).

[ReaperAA]

It is definitely a gray area. But if demo recorders did agree that vanilla complevels (cl2/cl3) should support longtics, then I see no reason why they wouldn't allow longtics support for Boom/MBF demos (cl9/cl11).

[Jayextee]

1 hour ago, Ferk said:

I'd vote for UBoom

 

Will agree with this, on the principle of keeping it simple (though I'd have capitalised it as 'uBoom' personally, but this is barely relevant) -- almost commented suggesting 'xBoom', but I have no good justification for the 'x' other than just plain liking the letter. 'UBoom' in whatever form makes sense given the UMAPINFO development.

[Graf Zahl]

32 minutes ago, ReaperAA said:

It is definitely a gray area.

 

AFAIK the reason to allow longtics is because a hacked vanilla EXE exists that can produce them.

 

[geo]

On 6/16/2019 at 8:20 AM, Linguica said:

Can we rename prboom+ yet? It's named for a coder who has been gone for decades, and has a suffix denoting it as a fork by another coder who has also been gone for years. It is also very Google unfriendly.

 

I propose the following names:
- BetterThanDoom
- TyDoom
- ProBoom
- DoomPlus
- PrBoomPlusOne
- Doom2008 (last update)
- StrawberryDoom (since chocolate and vanilla are taken)
- Doomy

Boom 2 seems like the best real name.

Edited June 18, 2019 by geo

[TheMightyHeracross]

38 minutes ago, geo said:

StrawberryDoom (since chocolate and vanilla are taken)

Strawberry's taken too.

 

Quote

- Doom2008 (last update)

That's PrBoom, not PrBoom+. PrBoom+ was last updated in 2016 2017.

Edited June 17, 2019 by TheMightyHeracross

[seed]

12 minutes ago, TheMightyHeracross said:

PrBoom+ was last updated in 2016.

 

2017 when it switched to SDL2...

 

Apart from saying "test" in the name it's very much stable and everything works in it (it's also the only option on newer versions of Windows), I would prefer people stop saying 3 years...

 

32 minutes ago, geo said:

- DoomPlus

 

That one is taken too.

[Graf Zahl]

The last download package is from 2016, that's why people say 3 years.

 

In response to this thread I have a suggestion: Bikeshed Doom. :D

 

[seed]

5 minutes ago, Graf Zahl said:

The last download package is from 2016, that's why people say 3 years.

 

Except that it's not? I don't understand.

 

http://prboom-plus.sourceforge.net/history.html

 

"2.5.1.5.test  @ 2017-May-05 19:47 - win32 build, sources"

[Shadow Hog]

I suspect that's more a debate about whether we're talking last stable release or last experimental release, and whether the inclusion of "test" in the version name means it counts as the latter or if it's still considered the former.

[seed]

4 minutes ago, Shadow Hog said:

I suspect that's more a debate about whether we're talking last stable release or last experimental release, and whether the inclusion of "test" in the version name means it counts as the latter or if it's still considered the former.

 

I think it should still be counted as stable honestly, apart from switching to SDL2 there's no other major changes in 2.5.1.5 that would make it a more experimental version.

[Graf Zahl]

2 hours ago, Ribbiks said:

 

From a compatibility standpoint it does not make sense to allow prb+ to create demos that would crash Boom.exe in the case where the original port would otherwise have no problems with loading the wad. If Boom couldn't load the wad in the first place (due to the map itself violating some other limits of the port) then it's fair game maybe, but it seems straight wrong for the demo itself to be the source of the crash, defeats the purpose of what complevel 9 is supposed to be.

 

Actually, Cybermind did it right by tagging such demos with a new version. So no worries on that front. Only problem I am facing is that the repos are incompatible so I'll have to merge his stuff manually, that may take a little because it also contains some refactorings in other areas that are quite extensive.

 

[Michael92]

PrBoom Deluxe (PrBoom DX)?

[CorianderCastor]

1 hour ago, Jayextee said:

 

Will agree with this, on the principle of keeping it simple (though I'd have capitalised it as 'uBoom' personally, but this is barely relevant) -- almost commented suggesting 'xBoom', but I have no good justification for the 'x' other than just plain liking the letter. 'UBoom' in whatever form makes sense given the UMAPINFO development.

 

Yes, the first letter being lowercase feels better, I didn't even think about that. Also, I said xBoom too: extended Boom. I think universal Boom is better though. 

[Noiser]

Boom Eternal!

[crazyflyingdonut]

Name it PrBoomDoomPlus. PRBDP. Not +, Plus.

[Altazimuth]

@Graf Zahl I didn't know a port's primary purpose was to be the most popular.

 

On 6/16/2019 at 2:20 PM, Linguica said:

Can we rename prboom+ yet?

I get why but PRBoom+ has name recognition and endless posts about it. If we're not making some brand new port why lose that? It's just going to confuse people, especially those new to the community or those watching old Youtube videos that mention the port by name.

[Graf Zahl]

8 minutes ago, Altazimuth said:

@Graf Zahl I didn't know a port's primary purpose was to be the most popular.

 

 

No need to be *most* popular, that "most" will most likely be decided by the alignment of the stars, but wouldn't you prefer to work on something popular than obscure?

 

[AD_79]

Agreed with Altaz, it really doesn't need a new name. People already recognize it as PR+, so a change is guaranteed to be confusing. It's still effectively the same port as before, just with UMAPINFO added, yeah?

[fabian]

4 hours ago, Zeskofp said:

Room

Broom

[Altazimuth]

PRBoom+, if it has one singular singular successor with a different name, won't care immensely about naming when it has momentum already. Offer improvements people want to PRBoom+ that don't compromise the project's integrity and people will come. It has its niche and it's successful within it. As long as other ports respect a port's niche then they'll be fine; hell even if EE managed to support most PRBoom+ complevels it'll never knock it out of its niche.

PRBoom+ isn't Eternity. It doesn't need releases specifically for it to do well. GZDoom being able to play PRBoom+ WADs isn't some awful threat to the port that means potential users will be lost. It doesn't need to be.

[Swalzi]

SoBoom Jr. (Son of Boom Jr.)
 

Spoiler

 

 

[LexiMax]

7 hours ago, Ferk said:

I'd vote for UBoom

 

I like this.

1. It makes it clear that it's a Boom derivative.
2. It's not yet another "extension" of the existing prefix or suffix.
3. The port's headliner feature is UMAPINFO.  U just makes sense in that context.

[TheMightyHeracross]

I'm still confused, some people are talking about naming Graf's fork, but some are talking about renaming PrBoom+ itself, which is what I took from the OP. Which one is going on in this thread? Because I don't see how we can just rename someone else's port without their say.

[Shadow Hog]

This thread was created entirely out of posts from the thread about Graf's UMAPINFO-implementing variant, so it should be about that; the thread title doesn't actually mention that fact, however, which is probably why people are confused.