Page MenuHomeWildfire Games

rename templates: javelinist → javelineer
ClosedPublic

Authored by Nescio on Jul 27 2020, 3:21 PM.

Details

Summary

This patch is a follow-up to D2591/rP23876. It renames all *javelinist* templates to *javelineer* and corrects all occurrences in the simulation/ files.
The maps/ files are not updated. Those could easily be corrected with an one-line sed command:

find binaries/data/mods/public/maps/ \( -name '*.js' -o -name '*.json' -o -name '*.xml' \) -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i 's,javelinist,javelineer,g'

Similar patches include D2254, D2756, D2774, D2796.

Test Plan

Check for correctness and completeness.

Diff Detail

Repository
rP 0 A.D. Public Repository
Lint
Automatic diff as part of commit; lint not applicable.
Unit
Automatic diff as part of commit; unit tests not applicable.

Event Timeline

Nescio created this revision.Jul 27 2020, 3:21 PM
Owners added a subscriber: Restricted Owners Package.Jul 27 2020, 3:21 PM
Nescio edited the summary of this revision. (Show Details)Jul 27 2020, 3:25 PM

Successful build - Chance fights ever on the side of the prudent.

Link to build: https://jenkins.wildfiregames.com/job/docker-differential/2791/display/redirect

Freagarach edited reviewers, added: Freagarach; removed: Restricted Owners Package.Aug 6 2020, 7:02 AM
Freagarach accepted this revision.Aug 7 2020, 3:05 PM
  • Checkrefs says its fine.
  • Grep also.
  • Playtesting also :)
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.Aug 7 2020, 3:05 PM
Freagarach updated this revision to Diff 13155.Aug 10 2020, 7:30 AM
  • Rebased.

I'll commit when green.

Successful build - Chance fights ever on the side of the prudent.

Link to build: https://jenkins.wildfiregames.com/job/docker-differential/2956/display/redirect

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Owners added a subscriber: Restricted Owners Package.Aug 10 2020, 8:00 AM

@Nescio, @Stan: Do we want to rename actors as well? (I guess Icons not due to them being art?)

Do we want to rename actors as well?

It would be more consistent, so I'd be in favour; it's up to the art team to decide, though.

(I guess Icons not due to them being art?)

What do you mean by that?

I mean they are binaries and I would guess renaming them would perhaps duplicate them in the version history. I'm not sure how SVN (or any SCM for that matters) handles binaries and renaming thereof ^^

I mean they are binaries and I would guess renaming them would perhaps duplicate them in the version history.

That has never been an objection in the past.

I'm not sure how SVN (or any SCM for that matters) handles binaries and renaming thereof ^^

I don't know either, but I guess if images are replaced, both versions are preserved in the version history, but if they're simply moved, then the files themselves aren't changed, only their location is, so there is no real need to duplicate them?