ServUO Client Versions?

FiftyTifty

FiftyTifty

With OrionUO having matured to a pretty good state, I figured I'd fire up ServUO and see what's what. Trouble is, there's a vast array of client versions kicking around, and OrionUO only supports 6.x.x.x right now (no .UOP support just yet).

I've got the 6.0.1.10, and 6.0.14.3 clients downloaded. They any good for ServUO?
 
Milva said:
Can't say I have ever used that client :) most use Ultimate Online Classic Client http://uo.com/Client-Download/ -but if you want to continue with your client maybe some one will help out
Click to expand...

OrionUO uses the game data, and client-server protocols, of the specific Classic Client version you point it to. The 7.x.x.x CC versions are currently unsupported, due to the UOP format not being supported just yet. 6.x.x.x, However, is supported by OrionUO.

The issue is that the ServUO repo uses the latest Classic Client, as far as I know. And I'd rather not resort to some old version of RunUO because, err, I'd be using an old version of RunUO.
 
I dont see how there would be an issue with it, I mean you can always try it after you link the normal files with the servuo server. Just try to see if you can login. I would say you can without any issues
 
ServUO is developed with the latest classic client in mind, however I am aware there are shards out there using the 6.x clients just fine. I don't think I would go 5.x and lower though.
 
Excuse me for smiling a bit. There are tens of thousands of lines of code in RunUO and ServUO uses most all of it with the exception of the modifications they made to make it, ServUO...

My favorite RunUO package right now is RunUO 2.7... it doesn't have everything ServUO has, but Mark Sturgill and Voxpire are working to slowly get it compatible with TOL. The difference is that RunUO 2.7 is an official RunUO repository. This is a matter of opinion, but I base my opinion on the fact that Mark was an original RunUO.com developer. ServUO is very stable, it's active, and most of the community is using it from what I can tell. RunUO 2.7 is just an extension of RunUO 2.3; they are opening the doors for future expansion, but work is slow moving, and it is really only for those who want to stick with what they know and refuse to move on with ServUO.

The choice is yours and both are viable solutions; with your project description I would suggest RunUO 2.7.
 
RunUO 2.7 is a great package, but it is not an official RunUO release it is a fork just like ServUO. Also, to my knowledge neither Mark nor Lee are actively working on it anymore.

Also ServUO has probably just as much as its own code now than what it took from RunUO.

At this point in time though I would recommend using RunUO 2.7 unless you are looking to keep up to date and eventually add UOP support to your client.
 
Alas, I'm having an issue with OrionUO, where it just doesn't want to see the server. Got it to show the login screen, but the server just doesn't receive any incoming connections from it. Posted about it on the official forum, so I'll see how that goes.

I actually took a wee look at the code earlier (just the PathFinding.cs file, admittedly), and did a bit of googling. Supposedly, ServUO doesn't really have any parallel nor multithreaded code, sans the world saving functionality. Does RunUO improve on this front at all?

I figured that ServUO is the best move, since it's got at least some semblance of a community. RunUO's forum is locked and filled with spam bots.
 
https://github.com/runuo/runuo

Mark's project is still ACTIVE...lol

It is just really slow moving. As to whether Voxpire is still helping, as far as I know he was, but things change and Mark could've found new help. I'm not trying to contradict dmurphy, but I want to get the facts cleared up. I personally wouldn't be relying on RunUO 2.7 if it wasn't active. Anyway I want to agree with dmurphy, your best bet is RunUO 2.7 to avoid .uop

...and a fork is just another way of saying a clone... it's the same as the official release, but this fork is being worked on by an original member of RunUO's former development team; that makes it more official in my opinion ;)

Also RunUO.com has reopened in full capacity. Ryan made mention that he was handing off the sites management to a few individuals and that he was going to allow some members to become moderators. However to be sure, it has come out of the "archive" stage and even has regained a regular following..lol
 
Last edited:
Ehh 7 months since the last time a maintainer was active on the repo. At work we would definitely qualify the whole repo as stale. But that's just us.
 
dmurphy said:
Ehh 7 months since the last time a maintainer was active on the repo. At work we would definitely qualify the whole repo as stale. But that's just us.
Click to expand...

From what I can tell Mark works on the repo when he has time. It's a side project not one he is concentrating on 100% of the time. With that said I think on average he updates once every 3-4 months. The last time this repository was touched was 2 months ago; this has been the norm. Maybe you are looking at an older version of the repo which has moved. ;)

awww.dropbox.com_s_8qto4k782ce57qr_Capture22.JPG_2af1cc59daae422c9ef0784d873e62a6.jpg
 
One line pull requests wouldn't qualify a repo as active if we were to go by industry standards. The last time a maintainer was active was in July.

ascreenshot.click_16_37_o8c7k_3yh6o.png
 
dmurphy said:
One line pull requests wouldn't qualify a repo as active if we were to go by industry standards. The last time a maintainer was active was in July.
Click to expand...

I'm going to agree to disagree with you, by your ideology you'd say my own repo has been inactive because I don't work on it and yet I do, just not everyday. Industry standards?! That would dictate unit tests for all the work done in the repo to prove each method works... there is nothing in RunUO or ServUO that is industry standard; that is just funny to insinuate. The entire project is mixmatch of work done by hundreds of different people (most of whom come from outside the industry) with several different outlooks on the project. For any RunUO-based project to claim they have tested every single line of code to make it industry standard is almost comical because that would take years to accomplish.
 
gametec said:
I'm going to agree to disagree with you, by your ideology you'd say my own repo has been inactive because I don't work on it and yet I do, just not everyday. Industry standards?! That would dictate unit tests for all the work done in the repo to prove each method works... there is nothing in RunUO or ServUO that is industry standard; that is just funny to insinuate. The entire project is mixmatch of work done by hundreds of different people with several different outlooks on the project. It's impossible to say you've managed to sync it all in one industry standard viable work. lol
Click to expand...

Seems I touched a hot button for you or something? I never said ServUO or RunUO were developed to industry standards. I said, that a repo that has no maintainer activity in over half a year would definitely be considered stale to the industry. I also don't insinuate anything. What I type is exactly what I intend to say - reading into it more than that is not recommended as I don't mean anything more than I say.

6 months without activity is inactive. Easy as.
 
You didn't hit a hot button, I'm just going to disagree with you...lol
As long as Mark is on the project it is active. What Ryan decides to do with RunUO 2.3 is going to determine if they will have what you consider to be an official release. Until then I stand by what I've stated in this thread.
 
gametec said:
You didn't hit a hot button, I'm just going to disagree with you...lol
As long as Mark is on the project it is active. What Ryan decides to do with RunUO 2.3 is going to determine if they will have what you consider to be an official release. Until then I stand by what I've stated in this thread.
Click to expand...

No problem, we both have differing ideas of what is active and what is not, no issue with that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back