Official Resignation

[SnakeLancerHaven]

Welp, Laz. There isn't much left to say, just like prevs active Devs like you, they've been ignored and in the end left the team. It's sad to see that this still happens even after takeover.

Even tho we didn't have a colorful conversation nevertheless I still respect and see you as a friend. Take care bud, hope to see you back one day, be it in Librelancer or here in Disco.

---

R.I.P Tabris...
Youtube - Twitch - My old Account

[Inferno]

*cough*

[Alex.]

First let me say that I fully understand your feelings around this, @Laz. I have not had sufficient time to review your things and for that I apologise.

I do have to mention for clarity that a lot of code submitted has been of your own iniative rather than about solving existing tasks at the direction of the other developers. Sometimes such contributions are reviewed and accepted, but it's often even slower.

But I have to say that @Xalrok made the right decision in terms of not accepting a launcher update - executable files should not be accepted from non-developers (even developers really) where we have not had a chance to review (and compile from reviewed source). Especially executable files not running on Discovery servers, but on individual players' client machines. This is a quite reasonable measure to protect the security of our players, it would be irresponsible to do otherwise.
He's not abusing his powers by rejecting patches made in such a way.
Now, what we might be able to do about those bugs is look through the patches that were written, build it internally, and distribute the result of that.

Furthermore I feel the need to add, due to the accusation now in the OP, that @Xalrok has been doing a good job, and I have seen no evidence whatsoever of corruption.

Edit: Also, the functionality about hiding unofficial servers was not a 'back-door'.

---

FLHook suggestions
All other dev queries
Please only PM me through the forums for things that need to be private like anticheat etc.

[Laz]

But I have to say that @Xalrok made the right decision in terms of not accepting a launcher update - executable files should not be accepted from non-developers (even developers really) where we have not had a chance to review (and compile from reviewed source). Especially executable files not running on Discovery servers, but on individual players' client machines. This is a quite reasonable measure to protect the security of our players, it would be irresponsible to do otherwise.

This would be understandable, had any of my launcher updates ever been reviewed, or if I had even been a dev when the new launcher was accepted. I wasn't 'on the team' when the new launcher went in, but continued to push updated for it without any of them ever being code reviewed.

Edit: If I remember correctly, which I may not, the launcher itself wasn't actually reviewed.

---

[diamond1]

Edited: If i see one point where everything goes right i'll be goddamn impressed. This is getting pretty repeditive and also being mildly irritating to everyone else.

---

[Backo]

...and removed the developer back-doors that were put in place to stop the old Admins from allowing people to connect to the old server...

wew lad

---

Republic of the Sword and Sun

[Saronsen]

Good luck laz

---

[Corile]

Alley was right.

---

Reflections on the Revolution in Gallia
Custodi // High City of Heraklion // The Cult of Archangels
Log Filter // Post Creator // Manhattan

[Alley]

First let me say that I fully understand your feelings around this, @Laz. I have not had sufficient time to review your things and for that I apologise.

I do have to mention for clarity that a lot of code submitted has been of your own iniative rather than about solving existing tasks at the direction of the other developers. Sometimes such contributions are reviewed and accepted, but it's often even slower.

But I have to say that @Xalrok made the right decision in terms of not accepting a launcher update - executable files should not be accepted from non-developers (even developers really) where we have not had a chance to review (and compile from reviewed source). Especially executable files not running on Discovery servers, but on individual players' client machines. This is a quite reasonable measure to protect the security of our players, it would be irresponsible to do otherwise.
He's not abusing his powers by rejecting patches made in such a way.
Now, what we might be able to do about those bugs is look through the patches that were written, build it internally, and distribute the result of that.

Furthermore I feel the need to add, due to the accusation now in the OP, that @Xalrok has been doing a good job, and I have seen no evidence whatsoever of corruption.

Edit: Also, the functionality about hiding unofficial servers was not a 'back-door'.

You said it yourself, the launcher is under source control. You would know -exactly- what has been changed and I'm sure you're more than capable of clicking the build button in Visual Studio yourself. Reviewing a changeset doesn't really take more than 5 minutes.

What a crap argument dude.

---

Alley was right.

[Vexykin]

Laz left, Farewells have been said. This is a leaving thread. This is getting nowhere.
Thread Locked

---

Tutorial Database

Liberty Rogues Official Discord:
https://discord.gg/Wt2RqVJ

Feel free to PM this account if you have any questions, I'm here to help!