17 Apr 07
Originally posted by baconfatsVery interesting reading. Does anybody in the forum have additional evidence in support or refuting the claims on that site regarding the supposed non-improvement of ChessDb over the original SCID?
The prolinux site in the original post refutes the chessdb version of scid. Interesting reading...
17 Apr 07
You can read all the sorry details of the debate in the scid-users mailing list, but the bottom line is that two people wanted to continue the code, they couldn't work together, they both think they are doing what is "right" and thus two forked projects (though one denies it is a fork at all).
As far as I can tell, having been trying both, ChessDB has focused on online play and automation of pgn imports (including from The Week in Chess) while the scid (the other one) has focused on making many more improvements to the db capabilities, tactical training, etc...
19 Apr 07
Originally posted by AlboMalapropFoozerYeah, but it's immeasurably more fun to read the vitriol of the two parties involved....
[b]zazen: Thanks for the info. Experience has taught me that it's generally easier to figure out the truth based upon the observations of a neutral third party rather than trying to figure it out from the stories of the two parties involved.[/b]
19 Apr 07
Originally posted by AlboMalapropFoozerThe main problem I have with ChessDB is that it won't build on my machine, which renders the whole thing rather useless.
Very interesting reading. Does anybody in the forum have additional evidence in support or refuting the claims on that site regarding the supposed non-improvement of ChessDb over the original SCID?
19 Apr 07
1 edit
Originally posted by AlboMalapropFoozerYeah, I just looked at the ChessDB source and the accusation that Dave Kirby plastered his name all over it is either outdated, or just plain not true. I looked at every file and without exception they contained something like this:
Very interesting reading. Does anybody in the forum have additional evidence in support or refuting the claims on that site regarding the supposed non-improvement of ChessDb over the original SCID?
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
//
// FILE: chessdblet.cpp
// ChessDBlet, a WinBoard chess engine
//
// Part of: ChessDB (Shane's Chess Information Database)
// Version: 3.4
//
// Notice: Copyright (c) 2002 Shane Hudson. All rights reserved.
//
// Author: Shane Hudson (sgh@users.sourceforge.net)
//
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
21 Apr 07
Originally posted by DeepThoughtI'm confused over your use of the word "build". Do you mean that 1) on your machine, the program does not have full functionality e.g. it will not build a database? or 2) on your machine, the program cannot be installed e.g. your OS is Linux and the program needs to be recompiled and won't? or 3) something else? Just curious as to what and why the problem is.
The main problem I have with ChessDB is that it won't build on my machine, which renders the whole thing rather useless.
25 Jul 07
Originally posted by MekkActually, the newer version of SCID on the prolinux site does support UCI engines. See the following part of the new feature list: http://prolinux.free.fr/scid/scid_newfeatures.html#seriousgame
There is one very important feature which scid (prolinux version) has and chessdb lacks - UCI engine support. In old scid and chessdb one must use polyglot. This is not only matter of convenience, UCI support means setting UCI engiine params, multi-0variation analysis etc.
Before upgrading to the new SCID, I could only use Fruit (a UCI engine) with polyglot. But now with the new SCID, I use Fruit directly and it works great.