Beta Control Naming Conventions

[LoPing]

Anyone have any ideas for a naming convention that might make it easier for Unreal Playground to automate version control for beta maps (i.e., if a beta is on a server and a newer beta is submitted it will put the newer version on the server, clear the old version from the various map lists, etc.)

I know the site changes may not happen immediately, but if the mappers have a consistent naming convention, then it may make the process easier. For example, if every (beta) map's name ended with "_Beta##" where ## is a number (01, 02, etc.), then the names would be parsable.

I guess a version number in the automated upload code or the dates on the .unr file would accomplish the same thing, but it may be harder for humans to deal with.

---

Oh, another thought: Once a user submits "CTF-SnakeOnAStick_Beta01.unr" only that user would be able to submit "CTF-SnakeOnAStick_Beta_whatever.unr"...otherwise people would be able to do considerable mischief like removing and replacing maps they don't like.

[StealthDP]

Very soon, the mapper will have control over his or her own maps... including deleting, renaming, changing screenshots, etc.

We wanted to give you mappers the ability to have your own customizable showplace for your creations.

Would that accomplish what you were asking for? Let us know... we are revamping the system now, and your input would be extremely helpful.

[Kingster]

This question kind of goes back to a document mangement issue... Of which I have more experience in than I really want.

LoPing has a great idea, in one sense. If we load a beta map on our "beta" server, wouldn't it be cool if there was a way that the mapper could change that map (one the game server) on the fly? There would have to be a certain amount of trust that goes along with this, but I think it could work. It would just take a bit of automation - something that wouldn't be too hard to do.

So... The question - how to manage that name? My proposal would be this:

Alpha tests - not yet server ready:
????????????.A###.unr
????????????.A###.utx
????????????.A###.umx

Beta tests - server ready:
????????????.B###.unr
????????????.B###.utx
????????????.B###.umx

General Release:
????????????.unr
????????????.utx
????????????.umx

This would give us a couple of things... First it would give us the mapper's impression of what it is ready for. In general from what I have seen, they are fairly legit about what they say the level of testing that should be done with the map. Second, it would give us the ability to script swaps of maps currently in beta on the server (script checks to see if ????????????.unr exists, if not, parse file name and get number from ????????????.B###.unr currently running - if lower than that of ????????????.B###.unr on download server, copy it and all related files to game server, otherwise, leave it alone).

Just some thoughts.

[Squirrelinabox]

Sweet Monk, even more goodies for mappers! :)

[Lord_Simeon]

Wicked.
I was hoping this implementation would come soon (page editing for mappers).

If a map is beta, maybe it should have _BETA after the title.
Would stop confusion.

My two cents.

[Freakish]

naw..it needs more than that since people often go through multiple beta stages..

[LoPing]

Kingster's scheme wouldn't be bad if the naming convention works for all platforms. Though I thought I was safe in offering two digits for the version --he's got THREE digits. I can imagine posting "Hey CTF-Anagogic version 875 is ready for testing! Knock yourself out!"

I'll use any consistent scheme the site wants to promote.

Having a beta on the game server that I could update and repost myself would be mind-blowing! People could make suggestions and the next night they'd see them implimented.

I think that one of the main reasons that the "shrink wrapped" levels (generally) look so good is that they are tested and tweaked to a high degree.

[Gui]

IMO naming the .utx and .umx the same name than the beta will give A LOT of work to the mapper everytime he changes of version 'cause UEd looks at the package name and not the texs that this package contains: if we must reassign all texs in the exact same way everytime, that'll be a nightmare very soon...

And with UT2K3 there will be always more and more new packages 'cause the mappers will create their own prefabs more and more often

:hammer:

It'd be better to change just the name of the .unr file...

[StealthDP]

I would think just using a naming convention on the .unr would suffice. The other files really are static, are they not?

[Gui]

This depends, but if there are some changes they're usually minor: in any case the player will just have to replace the packages with the new ones provided -like he'll do with the map itself- and there'll be no troubles...