Recently there has been an increasing interest in adding more official commands to GTP. Considering that the current draft specification has been stable (to choose a positive word) for a very long time now I don't think it's a good idea to make those changes to GTP version 2.
Some people may wonder why it's still a draft and with the risk of embarrassing myself I can reveal that mainly it has been stalled on me wanting to track down information for the Credits section but not finding enough inspiration to actually do that.
To get things moving again I propose finalizing the version 2 specification by the radical approach of simply removing the empty Examples and Credits sections from the draft, then opening up development of version 3.
Does anybody see a problem with this plan? Is there any fatal flaw in the specification draft that has to be fixed first?
In an attempt to help development of version 3 along I've set up a Wiki at http://trac.gnugo.org/gtp. It's currently bare but you can help filling it with relevant information yourselves.
/Gunnar
On 3/23/06, Gunnar Farnebäck gunnar@lysator.liu.se wrote:
Recently there has been an increasing interest in adding more official commands to GTP. Considering that the current draft specification has been stable (to choose a positive word) for a very long time now I don't think it's a good idea to make those changes to GTP version 2.
Some people may wonder why it's still a draft and with the risk of embarrassing myself I can reveal that mainly it has been stalled on me wanting to track down information for the Credits section but not finding enough inspiration to actually do that.
To get things moving again I propose finalizing the version 2 specification by the radical approach of simply removing the empty Examples and Credits sections from the draft, then opening up development of version 3.
Does anybody see a problem with this plan? Is there any fatal flaw in the specification draft that has to be fixed first?
In an attempt to help development of version 3 along I've set up a Wiki at http://trac.gnugo.org/gtp. It's currently bare but you can help filling it with relevant information yourselves.
I see no reason not to finalize v2 of the spec as is.
Evan
On Friday 24 March 2006 00.04, Gunnar Farnebäck wrote:
To get things moving again I propose finalizing the version 2 specification by the radical approach of simply removing the empty Examples and Credits sections from the draft, then opening up development of version 3.
[deleted]
In an attempt to help development of version 3 along I've set up a Wiki at http://trac.gnugo.org/gtp. It's currently bare but you can help filling it with relevant information yourselves.
Would you be violently opposed to converting GTP from the Go Players Protocol to the [board] Game Players Protocol? It's some time now since I did any games programming (been mainly busy with real work and KOffice), but before that, I adapted and implemented GTP for at least Amazon and Othello. I also have a working controlling engine (twogtp) for those games.
The main GTP structure is exceptionally easy to adapt, and it would be nice if the specification could be restructured to allow for special cases for certain games.
There is also at least one other program that use GTP for other games than go, and that is Paul Pogonyshevs GUI client Quarry (which rocks, btw).
-Inge
On 4/1/06, Inge Wallin inge@lysator.liu.se wrote:
On Friday 24 March 2006 00.04, Gunnar Farnebäck wrote:
To get things moving again I propose finalizing the version 2 specification by the radical approach of simply removing the empty Examples and Credits sections from the draft, then opening up development of version 3.
[deleted]
In an attempt to help development of version 3 along I've set up a Wiki at http://trac.gnugo.org/gtp. It's currently bare but you can help filling it with relevant information yourselves.
Would you be violently opposed to converting GTP from the Go Players Protocol to the [board] Game Players Protocol? It's some time now since I did any games programming (been mainly busy with real work and KOffice), but before that, I adapted and implemented GTP for at least Amazon and Othello. I also have a working controlling engine (twogtp) for those games.
The main GTP structure is exceptionally easy to adapt, and it would be nice if the specification could be restructured to allow for special cases for certain games.
There is also at least one other program that use GTP for other games than go, and that is Paul Pogonyshevs GUI client Quarry (which rocks, btw).
Ah yes, I had completely forgotten about this.
I think it would take some work to adapt the spec for this, so I would advocate pushing it to v3 (and releasing v2 as is).
I also have some Amazons code lying around that uses GTP. Inge and my programs have successfully played each other with his controller program (adapted from one of the GNU Go twogtp variants, iirc). So make that at least 4 programs ;)
Evan
On Saturday 01 April 2006 18.11, Evan Daniel wrote:
On 4/1/06, Inge Wallin inge@lysator.liu.se wrote:
On Friday 24 March 2006 00.04, Gunnar Farnebäck wrote:
To get things moving again I propose finalizing the version 2 specification by the radical approach of simply removing the empty Examples and Credits sections from the draft, then opening up development of version 3.
[deleted]
In an attempt to help development of version 3 along I've set up a Wiki at http://trac.gnugo.org/gtp. It's currently bare but you can help filling it with relevant information yourselves.
Would you be violently opposed to converting GTP from the Go Players Protocol to the [board] Game Players Protocol? It's some time now since I did any games programming (been mainly busy with real work and KOffice), but before that, I adapted and implemented GTP for at least Amazon and Othello. I also have a working controlling engine (twogtp) for those games.
The main GTP structure is exceptionally easy to adapt, and it would be nice if the specification could be restructured to allow for special cases for certain games.
There is also at least one other program that use GTP for other games than go, and that is Paul Pogonyshevs GUI client Quarry (which rocks, btw).
Ah yes, I had completely forgotten about this.
I think it would take some work to adapt the spec for this, so I would advocate pushing it to v3 (and releasing v2 as is).
Sorry that I was unclear. This is of course exactly what I meant.
-Inge
I also have some Amazons code lying around that uses GTP. Inge and my programs have successfully played each other with his controller program (adapted from one of the GNU Go twogtp variants, iirc). So make that at least 4 programs ;)
Evan _______________________________________________ gtp mailing list gtp@lists.lysator.liu.se http://lists.lysator.liu.se/mailman/listinfo/gtp
-
Evan Daniel -
Gunnar Farneb�ck -
Inge Wallin