It can be used as a database, but it is not fully refined. Maybe lichess can just slightly adjust study and create a new tab called "personal games" or something similar
well, with limitted resources (I see very few committers in lichess repo) I doubt this sort of feature would rise high up in the list of events. And compting in features like scid not reasonable. That loads of work.
Can you imagine how much work would be to implement bughouse on lichess? Loads of work. And guess what how many lichess users like to see it on lichess. lichess.org/forum/team-lichess-bughouse/days-without-bughouse-on-lichess
This is the nature of feature requests :)
Maybe one day Thibault will get up and say, hey study should be extended a little bit to be more database like! Or not :) Who knows?
This is the nature of feature requests :)
Maybe one day Thibault will get up and say, hey study should be extended a little bit to be more database like! Or not :) Who knows?
So why not just use SCID/chessbase?
@yyYYoah chessbase is closed source, proprietary and expensive. SCID is OK, but its GUI is... Hmm, how to say? Have you ever tried to use it?
Not to mention that web apps has some advantages over desktop apps.
I've used SCID a lot. And the fact that you find UI not good is another reason why people should not lightly to go into competition with other tools. Designing a good UI is big amount of work and implementing is still more work. And result may still fall short of goals.
But hey, this is open source. Just fork the source and implement it and then send pull request to main repo. No need petitions or anything . if what produce something of sufficient quality and utility it may well get in. Thing about open source is "dont whine, just do it"
But hey, this is open source. Just fork the source and implement it and then send pull request to main repo. No need petitions or anything . if what produce something of sufficient quality and utility it may well get in. Thing about open source is "dont whine, just do it"
@petri999
"I've used SCID a lot. And the fact that you find UI not good is another reason why people should not lightly to go into competition with other tools."
If I follow your logic Thibault should use FICS, instead of developing lichess. Interesting thinking.
"No need petitions or anything ."
Disagree. User feedback and feature request are all important for developers (not just bug reports). I can imagine that Thibault never played OTB tournaments and doesn't feel the need of chess database functionality inside lichess besides (today) study, but it may change in the future.
Btw. you can find my contribution to open source at github.com/gbtami if you are interested ;)
"I've used SCID a lot. And the fact that you find UI not good is another reason why people should not lightly to go into competition with other tools."
If I follow your logic Thibault should use FICS, instead of developing lichess. Interesting thinking.
"No need petitions or anything ."
Disagree. User feedback and feature request are all important for developers (not just bug reports). I can imagine that Thibault never played OTB tournaments and doesn't feel the need of chess database functionality inside lichess besides (today) study, but it may change in the future.
Btw. you can find my contribution to open source at github.com/gbtami if you are interested ;)
I did not say "not" just lightly. FICS is great but tech wise it is early nineteens with no good web interface. So there was motivation. and Lichess good place to play chess. Probably next effort is directed towards something that serves that. As there are plenty of databases anyhow
"FICS is great but tech wise it is early nineteens with no good web interface. So there was motivation."
I say:
SCID is great but tech wise it is early nineteens with no good web interface. So there can be motivation.
Anyhow, nobody asked for full SCID functionality inside lichess, just extending study to let it handle someones OTB games in one place. Telling the truth majority of work is already done in import and study features, so raising the (64 game) limit and creating a browse view seems doable. It's only Thibault decision if he wants such thing in lichess or not.
I say:
SCID is great but tech wise it is early nineteens with no good web interface. So there can be motivation.
Anyhow, nobody asked for full SCID functionality inside lichess, just extending study to let it handle someones OTB games in one place. Telling the truth majority of work is already done in import and study features, so raising the (64 game) limit and creating a browse view seems doable. It's only Thibault decision if he wants such thing in lichess or not.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.