[Csantucci]

I re-tested this morning. This morning debug timing seems to be more or less comparable with the 2013 Edition, except for the initial loading, which is not a big issue. Maybe I had something in background yesterday. Better so. I'll let you know whether something expires. I didn't get warnings about expirations by not entering an account.

[Lindsayts]

James Ross, on 11 May 2017 - 01:20 PM, said:

Compatibility with C# is excellent, so I would genuinely be surprised if there were any code problems should you switch to Visual Studio 2015/2017 right now; however, we're not going to break anything right away, so, if you'd prefer to continue with your current version, I'm happy to ensure we don't break it until you're ready.

It always pays to be cautious when upgrading compilers, I have had a number of cases where so called completely transparent complier upgrades caused compiles to fail.

Lindsay

[Csantucci]

James Ross, on 12 May 2017 - 01:02 PM, said:

According to the documentation, you may need to create an account to keep using the Community edition past 30 days, but no individual features are restricted (except online services which already need accounts, like Visual Studio Team Services, none of which we'll be using). I'm not sure if the 30 day thing is true, but do let us know if anything expires after 30 days.

I can confirm that afther 30 days I had to create an account to keep using the Community edition.

[cjakeman]

Csantucci, on 29 June 2017 - 07:23 AM, said:

I can confirm that after 30 days I had to create an account to keep using the Community edition.

2017 popped up with the following dialog for me. There's no money involved, so I guess it allows Microsoft to see how their product is used and to push announcements and paid extensions to us.

[James Ross]

Csantucci, on 29 June 2017 - 07:23 AM, said:

I can confirm that afther 30 days I had to create an account to keep using the Community edition.

Ah, that is slightly disappointing; I hope people do not have a serious problem with registering Visual Studio Community with a Microsoft account, which can be created just for this purpose if desired.

If people do want to try an alternative, there is Visual Studio Code which has an official C# extension that provides a reasonable but not VS-level of editing, but doesn't currently have out-of-the-box compiling/debugging AFAICS (although it can probably be configured to work). Similar setups are likely possible with other modern/advanced editors (e.g. Atom, Sublime Text 3, etc.).

[cjakeman]

Instead of the 2017 version, you can also use the 2015 version of Visual Studio Community Edition which is available from CNet.com. I'm pretty sure that 2015 edition does not prompt for an account at Microsoft.

(It's still available direct from Microsoft, but you have to register an account before you can download from them.)

[Shocsix]

Cant Wait to see what you guys do with open rails

[jkcooney]

Eldorado.Railroad, on 10 May 2017 - 06:03 PM, said:

Open Rails uses XNA 3.1, which only really needs Visual Studio 2008 to compile.

Yeah, Visual Studio 2010 is..."old"...all relative really. If you are trying to encourage new developers to come to Open Rails, "moving the goal post" might not be the way to do it. Certainly not now, perhaps in a few years. If I am wrong and a deluge of new developers are "champing at the bit " to be in Open Rails with Visual Studio 2015/2017, I stand rebuffed.

Likewise, if the principals are planning to move to another platform, other than XNA 3.1, I would outline what the plan is to do so and on what time schedule. Again, the move to yet another compiler suite would be premature until more than the basics are in place to run what we can run now with Open Rails.

For someone such as yourself, I can see that the cutting edge requires that you have the latest tools, employers may demand that. But Open Rails in its present form does not require it. My guess is that you would like to not have to deal with a multitude of IDEs. I understand that, but that is also the reason for having several machines and OS versions. Yes, it castrates the portability, by requiring more hardware, but it maintains the current development platform for the rest of us. I complained back in the day when Open Rails was moved to Visual Studio 2010. If there was a sudden surge in development because Visual Studio 2010 was used instead of 2008, as in, a much greater number of personnel climbing onboard compiling code for Open Rails I would have agreed with the change. As things stand right now, we are trying to recruit more software developers, yet the plan is to yet again change the tools to compile the code.

Some other considerations might be in order. Maybe it is time to place a posting that asks, what IDE would you prefer to compile/contribute Open Rails with, and make you decision on that basis? The answer might surprise both of us!

Thanks!
Steve

Steve's point is well taken. If the goal to encourage more involvement then it might be wise to defer any changeover until it can be done seamlessly .... perhaps there is a method of accommodating both the older version and the latest version.... offer two options for contributors..... it seems as if the programs / platforms should be compatible.
jc

[jkcooney]

Csantucci, on 12 May 2017 - 10:36 PM, said:

I re-tested this morning. This morning debug timing seems to be more or less comparable with the 2013 Edition, except for the initial loading, which is not a big issue. Maybe I had something in background yesterday. Better so. I'll let you know whether something expires. I didn't get warnings about expirations by not entering an account.

These types of inconsistencies become annoying. Not knowing what to expect each time your activate the sim is bit of a turnoff for me.

[jkcooney]

Shocsix, on 30 July 2017 - 03:48 PM, said:

Cant Wait to see what you guys do with open rails

You'll find many useful tools that MSTS lacks. For me, it is somewhat daunting or a little overkill. There are so many features, options, applications and procedures ...not to mention the keystrokes.... involved that I find myself basically using it to check mileages on the route I have laid out. jc