CypherJF

log4j was pretty easy to use... include the JAR file in the classpath and add the following to your class file private static final Logger logger = Logger.getLogger(ClassName.class); bam, done. Looks from the FAQ all you need is: Here is the suggested usage template: public class Foo { private static readonly ILog log = LogManager.GetLogger(typeof(Foo)); ... other code } An equivalent and more portable solution, though slightly longer, is to use the declaring type of the static constructor. public class Foo { private static readonly ILog log = LogManager.GetLogger(System.Reflection.MethodBase.GetCurrentMethod().DeclaringType); ... other code } Note: the .NET Compact Framework 1.0 does not support System.Reflection.MethodBase.GetCurrentMethod().

Why reinvent the wheel other then forcing someone to release it under GPL? Use Apache Logging <http://logging.apache.org/>; licensed under the Apache Commons License <http://logging.apache.org/log4net/license.html>.

Seems like the map is truncated; doesn't completely match the test map on the server. The test player keeps entering and leaving randomly; and, the client need's some way of controlling the speed of the movement. My arrow keys make the map spin too quickly with the slightest touch. But nice work thus far.

are you talking about something similar to infantry's interface for selecting options, etc.?

This could be plausable...

I don't see any log entries that are helpful; so I've decreased the amount of log rotations which take place which should capture more time. Let me know when it happens again, in the mean time I'm going to check my server instances log to see if anything happened to mine as well.

Sounds good

One other thing to note is the biller isn't complete yet; for example, BanG hasn't been implemented for a front end. The biller does have the capability of banning players based on several criteria.

I don't want another set of forums to visit on a daily basis..

I don't believe there to be any issues; the uptime is relatively sound. The host I'm on has been up 104 days and counting. The biller itself was recycled to pick up a patch change 3 days ago (?buptime). If I know there will be live zones, I'll be willing to take into consideration population levels to minimize outage time for zones. I do a lot (if not all) of testing on my local PC/server to make sure subgame and ASSS (tcp and udp) seem to connect, then run a few commands. I try my best to also include a checkpoint where I login with 2 clients on different servers locally to emulate cross-zone communications. If you do encounter issues with the biller, send me a message as soon as possible with a timestamp so I can review the logs. Smong's piratez zone has been connected for some time; and has only reported 1 issue which I have hoped to have fixed with this latest release.

Hall's saved me in a week of class... it was probably one of the best time to get it but still.. colds/sore throats suck.

s!@#$%^&*, you know what i think needs changed.

The biller isn't aware of who is a mod, smod, sysop. So I don't think this would work unless it's connected to BanG somehow.

You shouldn't use BanG via a 3rd party biller. If you have SSC hosting, login to a SSC zone to perform BanG operations.

Yeah, you would need to use your SSC password to login through the 3rd party biller. This does raise some concern about the possibility of malicious intent.

Right now on the Accede Website you can login with your game credentials, so yes. But, this will most likely change if I change the security of the accounts which I do plan on doing.

I like this idea, and it could potentionally be done. For example, your profile username could be the user's e-mail address. Once logged in it could utilize the first part infront of the @ for the userid until you setup a alias afterwhich you can own. But, with VIE login the rejection message is hardcoded within the client ("Invalid name. Your name must start with a letter or a number. Please choose a new name."). So if someone entered in a non-valid e-mail address format the new player wouldn't have a clue of what to do. But, first login with a unique e-mail address they can be immediately bumped off until they validate they own the e-mail they provided which would be nice.

will accede's network ban also ban you from SSC zones? See my clarification point 1, hopefully that answers the question. Short answer no, the converse does not hold true. Just because you're banned on Accede doesn't mean you'll be banned on SSC.

I appreciate the feedback! rootbear, I have modified the vote count to reflect your vote change. Let me clarify a point - The e-mail generated comes from the biller (accede@somedomain.com) and the end-user e-mail is never exposed to the sender of the message. But, I do see your point about the potential of SPAM. Absolutely, it would have to be included. Currently, on the prototype site, you can only view your seen/sent messages which haven't expired. Technically yes, I could implement the biller to have it's own chatnet server and allow this. But, I would encourage user's to play in a game server where the fun takes place.

will accede's network ban also ban you from SSC zones? No, the converse is not true. Accede's bans will not effect SSC zones.

What are some things that you like, or dislike about the SSC or Catid's biller software/features... What do you think should be expanded upon, or changed?

There are discussions of whether or not a biller could be made to work with SSC. If it is possible, would you consider having your zone connect to such a biller? Or, do you think it's best for a open biller to be stand alone? This means that although user accounts (etc) are synced; SSC ban's will be enforced ontop of any Accede network ban's that might be set. The results of this will help determine how much time should be invested in this option. Clarification 1: With netbans, if you were banned on SSC you won't be allowed in Accede. But, if you're banned with Accede, does NOT imply you will be banned on SSC. The only netbans I forsee Accede having are blacklisting individuals or hosts from connecting who threaten the stability of the server. Other offenses have to be dealt on a server-by-server basis until it is flagged for review of a network wide Accede ban. BanG details are still in draft. Please provide feedback as necessary!

Currently, both SSC and Accede allow the e-mail address of a user to be set once. Should user's be allowed the ability to change their e-mail multiple times? Please provide feedback as necessary!

I'm seeking your feedback to determine whether or not this should make a blip on my radar for development or not. With SSC, you may only leave 1 message to a user. If you try to send multiple messages your previous message is lost and replaced with the new. My proposal would allow for a mailbox type of system. You may be allowed X number of messages in the box, but may be from any individual. Accede already has the capability of notifying a offline recipient, when they have ?SETEMAIL, of a message via e-mail. However, it is currently disabled via a global biller configuration. Clarification #1: The e-mail generated comes from accede@somedomain.com and does not send anything but the username of the person who left you the message. See below. Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 01:21:29 -0600 (CST) From: accede@example.com To: recipient@domain.com Subject: (SubSpace Republic) Private Message Attention, This e-mail is to inform you that 'CypherJF' has sent you the following message on 2008-01-02 01:21:27 via the SubSpace Republic. testing email message PLEASE, DO NOT RESPOND TO THIS E-MAIL, IT IS UNMONITORED. Please provide feedback as necessary!