| 01:00.56 | *** join/#bzflag Flash (~jwmelto@c-75-70-62-116.hsd1.co.comcast.net) |
| 01:00.56 | *** join/#bzflag Flash (~jwmelto@bzflag/developer/Flash) |
| 02:03.23 | I_Died_Once | drive by quick question - when making a plugin for a custom flag, is it possible to use a number in the flag's initials? |
| 02:03.44 | I_Died_Once | as in, would it screw anything up? |
| 02:03.50 | I_Died_Once | would it be recognized? |
| 02:04.13 | I_Died_Once | I might not be wording my question correctly |
| 02:22.00 | *** join/#bzflag I_Died_Once (~I_Died_On@unaffiliated/idiedonce/x-1828535) |
| 02:46.21 | allejo | for anyone in here wondering, yes it is possible to have a number in the initials of a flag. the initials are const chars so they don't cause issues |
| 02:48.32 | I_Died_Once | woot, ty allejo |
| 02:50.59 | blast007 | so now we can have an A1 flag that makes tanks DELICIOUS?? |
| 02:51.38 | spldart | mmmmmmMMMMMMmmmmmm delicious |
| 02:52.55 | allejo | blast007 you would create the new useless flag |
| 02:53.40 | I_Died_Once | little steak sauce bottle tipping over near the tank parts |
| 03:06.41 | *** join/#bzflag jeffm (~jeffm@cpe-76-167-239-8.socal.res.rr.com) |
| 03:06.41 | *** join/#bzflag jeffm (~jeffm@unaffiliated/jeffm2501) |
| 03:06.41 | *** mode/#bzflag [+v jeffm] by ChanServ |
| 04:59.11 | Constitution | is anything still happening in the 2.99 continuing branch? |
| 04:59.35 | jeffm | <PROTECTED> |
| 04:59.59 | Constitution | what was the reason for it again? |
| 05:00.39 | jeffm | because some people thought bzflag wasn't dea |
| 05:00.41 | jeffm | dead |
| 05:01.09 | jeffm | and it'd be simpler to find 2.99 code there then in history |
| 05:01.26 | Constitution | oh |
| 05:01.52 | Constitution | is that where we moved "trunk" when 2.0.whatever became trunk? |
| 05:01.58 | jeffm | yeah |
| 05:07.06 | Constitution | so what would happen if we 1) spent some time aggressively documenting/mapping where stuff is and how the various parts of the code fit together (seems to be a primary issue for new developers, and 2) shift focus for a while heavily toward the user interface/menu system, and setting up some kind of tutorial mode? |
| 05:07.39 | jeffm | dude, you think we can do anything aggressive or heavy? |
| 05:07.58 | jeffm | look at the state of it all |
| 05:08.37 | jeffm | if you could get that level of development again, it would not matter what we worked on |
| 05:12.12 | jeffm | you feel that the biggest problem now is that people don't know how to play? not that playing itself is hard? |
| 05:12.26 | Constitution | I realize development is stagnant... I am talking about what kind of change in approach might allow things to continue |
| 05:12.45 | jeffm | hardball, assignments, deadlines |
| 05:12.49 | Constitution | yes, I believe the game is unfriendly toward new players |
| 05:13.03 | jeffm | that is not an answer to the question |
| 05:13.10 | jeffm | that is a statement of a symptom |
| 05:13.36 | jeffm | personally I don't know if this group has it in them to do anything major |
| 05:14.04 | jeffm | but first we'd have to figure out what would be best to put efforts into, and I don't know if a simple tutorial would be worth it |
| 05:14.21 | jeffm | would it not be better to fix the problems that make the game so hard to play/pickup? |
| 05:14.41 | jeffm | lag, cheating, inconstancies, and the like, rather then teach people how to get around them? |
| 05:15.50 | Constitution | I was trying to answer the question... I do believe one of the most (possibly THE most) critical issue right now is a significant decline in player levels. and yes I do believe that has a lot to do with how hard it is to learn how to start playing the game |
| 05:16.22 | jeffm | what makes you think that having more players will reignite development? |
| 05:16.25 | Constitution | I admit I have been more active as a player than as a developer over the last few years, so I bring more of a player's perspective |
| 05:16.48 | jeffm | why did the older players leave? |
| 05:17.57 | Constitution | I care less about "reigniting" development as an end in itself and view it more as a means to make the game more appealing |
| 05:18.25 | jeffm | then you are not solving any problems, you are just trying to slow down the death |
| 05:18.30 | Constitution | I'm sure everyone has a different answer for that question |
| 05:18.33 | jeffm | you are not doing anything to keep people playing |
| 05:18.44 | jeffm | you just want more noobs |
| 05:19.02 | Constitution | everyone starts as a noob |
| 05:19.12 | jeffm | yes but why did they stop playing |
| 05:19.37 | jeffm | you want to add more new people, will the quit in the same time frame? |
| 05:20.44 | jeffm | personally I think if we don't fix the core issues, having a tutorial will just make the game look worse, you'll have a push to get more people in it and it'll fail to keep them due to a weak core |
| 05:21.15 | Constitution | as I said, everyone has a different answer for why people leave. look at the download stats... new people are trying to come. I want to make it easier for them to try it, like it, and stay longer. eventually most people leave |
| 05:21.23 | jeffm | providing a manual for a 1973 pinto don't make people drive it when they can get a newer car ;) |
| 05:21.56 | jeffm | it's possible it could be learning to play, but the people that learned to play still quit |
| 05:22.30 | jeffm | I know what could be done to try and get that stuff done, but I don't think it'll get anywhere because nobody will be willing to do it |
| 05:22.44 | jeffm | and in documenting it all we will find all the core problems |
| 05:23.04 | jeffm | and then what? if your goal is not new development, what was all the work for? |
| 05:24.33 | Constitution | what constitutes a "problem" in the code is relative... at one point or another, someone who wrote that code thought it was a good idea. if we had a document that mapped out the code, what functionality was handled where, then at least people could find stuff to change/fix with less effort |
| 05:24.48 | jeffm | no I don't mean a problem in the code, I mean in the design |
| 05:25.17 | jeffm | how are you going to make a tutorial that tells people to "figure out how much the guy you are shooting is lagging, then lead by that much" |
| 05:26.16 | jeffm | and the problem is not all behaviors are due to a single person |
| 05:26.25 | jeffm | some are the results of code from different people mixing |
| 05:26.36 | jeffm | but what you are asking for is a design document after the fact |
| 05:26.51 | jeffm | something that says "this is how it's supposed to work, anything else is a bug" |
| 05:27.00 | *** join/#bzflag QuantumBeep (~IceChat9@cpe-76-186-207-158.tx.res.rr.com) |
| 05:27.21 | jeffm | That would probably take several weeks of hard work |
| 05:28.41 | Constitution | I just want to be able to find stuff. Anytime I go look for something I want to tweak, I find three or four source files with names that look like they might contain what I want, and they don't, so eventually I give up |
| 05:28.59 | jeffm | yeah it was not well designed |
| 05:29.06 | jeffm | we all want it to be better :) |
| 05:29.15 | jeffm | but nobody has ever wanted to do the work |
| 05:29.19 | jeffm | and it sounds like not even you |
| 05:30.34 | Constitution | we've had many aborted starts in regards to refactoring the source code... if it was just easier to find what I am looking for, I would still work on it |
| 05:31.08 | jeffm | so if the code was refactored, you'd work on refactoring it more :) |
| 05:31.17 | Constitution | "it" meaning working on other things, not on refactoring... I think we've given up on refactoring |
| 05:31.39 | jeffm | but you aren't willing to work on documenting it |
| 05:31.52 | jeffm | at this point we have given up on all development |
| 05:32.08 | jeffm | it took a YEAR to get a point release with no real bug fixes just for debian out |
| 05:32.28 | Constitution | I am, but I don't even have a good overall knowledge of the code myself... there are maybe only a handful of people who still do |
| 05:32.42 | jeffm | no one person does |
| 05:32.48 | jeffm | it's going to take someone to round up all that info |
| 05:32.51 | jeffm | and dig |
| 05:32.54 | jeffm | dig hard |
| 05:33.42 | jeffm | that is work you will be hard pressed to find people to do on there own |
| 05:34.20 | jeffm | when I drew up the plans for 2.4 and 2.4.2 they were a huge help but that was only part of it |
| 05:34.25 | Constitution | okay, fair enough |
| 05:34.29 | jeffm | you have to hound people on a daily basis |
| 05:34.38 | jeffm | it requires proper management |
| 05:35.19 | jeffm | if anything is to ever happen with this project again, it needs to be run like a commercial development project |
| 05:35.26 | jeffm | imho |
| 05:35.50 | jeffm | it's the only method that has shown any efectiveness |
| 05:37.21 | Constitution | so delegation? |
| 05:37.27 | jeffm | more then that |
| 05:37.32 | jeffm | assignment |
| 05:37.45 | jeffm | "you do this, if you can't let me know and I'll find someone who can" |
| 05:38.23 | jeffm | how would your job work out if everyone could patrol what ever part of town they wanted? :) |
| 05:40.37 | Constitution | not well |
| 05:40.52 | *** join/#bzflag allejo (~allejo@cpe-76-90-186-178.socal.res.rr.com) |
| 05:41.12 | jeffm | volunteers are good and well, but they usually don't do well if not guided, strongy |
| 05:41.15 | jeffm | strongly |
| 05:41.31 | Constitution | sometimes people do step up and fix stuff... sadly, not often enough |
| 05:41.43 | jeffm | sure they do, but it's an exception |
| 05:41.49 | jeffm | thats why we say they are exceptional |
| 05:42.04 | jeffm | they can be a good part of a thing, but usually not it's whole |
| 05:42.24 | jeffm | we have seen where leaving development to chance has left us... |
| 05:46.37 | Constitution | motivation is another issue... people like to work on what they actively use. I think we lost a lot of people through the "2.0 is a dead end, don't work on it, long live 2.2!" mentality |
| 05:47.15 | jeffm | sure people like to do as little as possible |
| 05:47.34 | jeffm | and if you want to move forward you have to stop poking at the past |
| 05:47.35 | Constitution | even today, it seems like any really significant work done is likely to be pushed off into some future release branch that never sees the light of day |
| 05:47.49 | jeffm | what you want would require 2.6, so we'd have to do the exact same thing |
| 05:48.03 | jeffm | that's how software is MADE |
| 05:48.19 | jeffm | so what you want to just poke at 2.4 some more, not able to add messages? |
| 05:48.33 | jeffm | you want a tutorial but the game doesn't support a tutorial, or dialogs. or anything |
| 05:49.21 | jeffm | all development projects have developers work on future releases, it takes management to make sure they get released |
| 05:49.26 | jeffm | that is where we fail |
| 05:49.45 | Constitution | I don't care what version number my code goes into, as long as it goes into the mainstream code that people actually use on a short timeline |
| 05:50.11 | Constitution | okay, I see what you're saying |
| 05:50.30 | jeffm | sure it's good to release often |
| 05:50.39 | jeffm | but that means we have to have enough to release |
| 05:50.50 | jeffm | the problem is that your code is the ONLY code submitted in 6 months |
| 05:51.16 | jeffm | software doesn't get released by magic :) |
| 05:51.35 | jeffm | it seems like you want a lot of things but have no idea how other projects get them |
| 05:52.23 | Constitution | probably |
| 05:52.53 | jeffm | they have a release plan, and someone to implement it |
| 05:52.59 | jeffm | they have a design plan |
| 05:53.05 | jeffm | and someone to ensure it gets done |
| 05:53.20 | jeffm | firefox did not just happen due to a ton of patches |
| 05:53.37 | Constitution | lol |
| 05:54.14 | jeffm | you laugh at that, but that's what you are assuming will happen with bzflag, people will do whatever they want and the bzflag you want will emerge |
| 05:54.24 | jeffm | it won't |
| 05:54.37 | jeffm | what you will get is a jumble of unmaintainable crap |
| 05:54.43 | Constitution | I was laughing because it was humorous, not because it wasn't true |
| 05:54.47 | jeffm | oh look, I have that in a folder called "trunk" |
| 05:55.13 | jeffm | you have bassicly said it's unmaintainable already |
| 05:55.24 | jeffm | and time has shown that it isn't |
| 05:55.32 | jeffm | not in the projects current form |
| 05:57.44 | jeffm | I think what you are asking is what would it take to bring the project back undercontroll and produce a release with the goal of getting and keeping new players. |
| 05:58.25 | jeffm | part of bringing it back under control would be to make the project maintainable in some way, documentation, code split, refactoring, whatever works |
| 05:58.29 | *** join/#bzflag noyb (~noyb@pool-74-100-89-192.lsanca.dsl-w.verizon.net) |
| 06:00.17 | Constitution | I really have no interest in revisiting the idea of "kickstarting" or "reigniting" development on a large scale or shortening the release cycle. I am talking about working on one or two specific areas that I think are important. I would do some or all of this work myself, but 1) actually understanding the layout of the code would make it a lot easier, and 2) something gives me the feeling that what I am talking about is a lower priority |
| 06:00.17 | Constitution | to other people in here and it might never see the light of day |
| 06:00.46 | DTRemenak | doesn't matter if anyone else cares. if you care, do it. and if you want it released, release it. |
| 06:01.27 | DTRemenak | it's not like you'll be breaking anyone else's plans |
| 06:01.32 | jeffm | yeah |
| 06:01.40 | DTRemenak | and if you find you are, then start collaborating with them |
| 06:01.45 | jeffm | as it sits now do what you want to do |
| 06:02.19 | jeffm | but the fact that you come here asking how to do it and what it would take means you ether don't understand the magnitude, or don't have the desire to do it on your own |
| 06:02.33 | jeffm | or the desire to take the control required to get others to do it for you |
| 06:02.37 | jeffm | all are options |
| 06:02.57 | jeffm | if you don't understand the code, ASK ;) |
| 06:03.04 | jeffm | or dig and learn, those are your 2 choices |
| 06:03.08 | DTRemenak | if there's part of the process that you can't do yourself, then either a) decide it doesn't need to be done, or b) chase someone down and ask/beg/blugeon them into doing it |
| 06:03.38 | DTRemenak | but (a) is acceptable a lot more than most people think |
| 06:03.51 | DTRemenak | if it really matters, someone will object that it's not being done, and/or do it themselves |
| 06:04.24 | jeffm | yeah then you actually have 2 people working on it ;) |
| 06:04.37 | DTRemenak | true that :) |
| 06:04.54 | jeffm | the fact that you don't want to "start development' tells me your heart isn't in it, that you just have wishes |
| 06:06.03 | jeffm | all your wishes are doable, someone just has to do them |
| 06:07.04 | Constitution | the magnitude of "starting development" seems a lot larger than setting up a few goals and working toward them... plus I've seen too many attempts and too much talking about it over the years |
| 06:07.27 | DTRemenak | setting a goal and working towards it is the fundamental unit of development |
| 06:07.30 | jeffm | that's how development gets started again |
| 06:07.34 | jeffm | yeah it's the same thing |
| 06:07.46 | DTRemenak | when one guy is working on a project, it's the ONLY unit of development ;) |
| 06:07.50 | jeffm | all you are doing now is talking ;) |
| 06:07.57 | jeffm | the same as you have talked before |
| 06:08.20 | Constitution | but talking is so much easier than actually working on it :) |
| 06:08.53 | jeffm | so you knew the answer to your question all along |
| 06:10.48 | Constitution | mostly I didn't feel capable/qualified to tackle the mapping/documentation aspect myself... as I said, I have a lot of trouble finding stuff |
| 06:11.01 | jeffm | so? |
| 06:11.10 | Constitution | and the thought of wading through 100k sloc or whatever we have now is daunting |
| 06:11.12 | jeffm | you are incapable of asking or searching? |
| 06:11.16 | DTRemenak | black box things |
| 06:11.26 | jeffm | yeah there are ways to break the work up |
| 06:11.42 | jeffm | it's all part of software development, breaking big problems into small manageable steps |
| 06:11.49 | jeffm | that's all we do when we program |
| 06:11.58 | jeffm | you ether have the will or you don't |
| 06:12.02 | jeffm | if you don't it doesn't matter |
| 06:12.02 | DTRemenak | be willing to say "this does such and so, and it interacts with that, and also I have no idea how THAT works" |
| 06:12.26 | jeffm | then you fill THAT in later when you do get it |
| 06:13.08 | DTRemenak | leave holes around whatever you don't understand. you can come back, or go deeper, or ask the author later...but in the meantime, you'll have something pretty good for the part you do understand |
| 06:13.46 | jeffm | and a list of things to ask people about |
| 06:14.15 | DTRemenak | and I think most folks will answer questions about stuff that they actually wrote. I will, at least. |
| 06:14.37 | jeffm | and some of us would probably help you figure out the stuff they didn't write ;) |
| 06:14.51 | DTRemenak | yeah, I wasn't going to go that far ;) |
| 06:15.09 | Constitution | sigh... okay |
| 06:15.21 | DTRemenak | there are plenty of bits of bzflag that I don't understand either. doesn't matter, I've been able to do what I wanted to. |
| 06:15.50 | jeffm | see, your heart isn't in it, you came here wishing for wings that worked |
| 06:16.13 | Constitution | it might be... I still have to find out |
| 06:16.41 | jeffm | it's hard to look at our own questions, specially when we know the answers are not the ones weaned to hear |
| 06:16.47 | Constitution | you are right... it is easier to talk about things, and projects always turn out to be more complicated than they look |
| 06:17.20 | DTRemenak | if you're talking about internal doc, you wouldn't be the first one to do part of it. and the part that's done, is useful. more would also be useful, I imagine. |
| 06:17.22 | jeffm | life turns out be more complicated then it looks, you can ether deal or give up |
| 06:18.16 | DTRemenak | narrow down the scope of the problem until it's small enough that you think you can handle it |
| 06:19.00 | DTRemenak | "deal or give up" sounds final, but it's really a decision that you can make over and over again. I'll deal with it here, I'll give up there. |
| 06:19.21 | jeffm | ok, deal or delay, if you keep delaying till you die :) |
| 06:19.30 | DTRemenak | well, yeah :) |
| 06:19.39 | DTRemenak | you've only got 80 years or something :) |
| 06:20.39 | Constitution | I think my life expectancy is 55 or so in my current occupation ;) |
| 06:20.52 | jeffm | hey, I offered you a better job many times :) |
| 06:22.11 | Constitution | true |
| 06:22.23 | Constitution | well, dunno about "better" ;) |
| 06:22.29 | DTRemenak | so...if you're looking at a 20-year project, it's doable. also daunting as heck. better to figure out how to divide it into a thousand one-week projects, and commit to just the first one ;) |
| 06:22.59 | jeffm | safer at the least |
| 06:51.10 | BulletCatcher | When I started doing BZFlag development I was probably spending at least 10 hours a week on it. |
| 06:51.14 | BulletCatcher | Even at that rate, it was about a year before I had learned enough to answer more questions than I asked. |
| 06:53.35 | BulletCatcher | Those of us who can find relevant parts should be perfectly willing to help you with that, Constitution, if that is your biggest obstacle to making useful changes. |
| 06:55.03 | *** join/#bzflag apeman (~apeman@115-188-244-191.jetstream.xtra.co.nz) |
| 07:05.36 | *** join/#bzflag ashvala (~ashvala@unaffiliated/ashvala) |
| 08:40.22 | *** join/#bzflag lahwran- (lahwran@sonicrules.org) |
| 09:07.31 | *** join/#bzflag delusional_ (~delusiona@pool-108-17-117-49.pitbpa.fios.verizon.net) |
| 09:07.31 | *** join/#bzflag delusional_ (~delusiona@unaffiliated/delusional) |
| 09:18.10 | *** join/#bzflag Pimpinella (~frank@gondolin.pimpi.org) |
| 09:24.51 | *** join/#bzflag I_Died_Once (~I_Died_On@unaffiliated/idiedonce/x-1828535) |
| 09:30.12 | *** join/#bzflag bulletmark (~bulletmar@113.28.52.249) |
| 10:57.10 | *** join/#bzflag ahs3- (~quassel@adsl-065-005-193-158.sip.rdu.bellsouth.net) |
| 12:17.54 | *** join/#bzflag lahwran (lahwran@unaffiliated/lahwran) |
| 13:04.06 | *** join/#bzflag jcp (~alex@opengroove.org) |
| 13:04.06 | *** join/#bzflag jcp (~alex@bzflag/contributor/javawizard2539) |
| 13:18.18 | *** join/#bzflag ashvala (~ashvala@unaffiliated/ashvala) |
| 14:10.46 | *** join/#bzflag ashvala (~ashvala@unaffiliated/ashvala) |
| 14:46.41 | *** part/#bzflag Thumper_ (~Thumper@about/essy/coffeeAddict/Thumper) |
| 16:32.49 | *** join/#bzflag JeffM (~JeffM@76-218-80-21.lightspeed.irvnca.sbcglobal.net) |
| 16:32.50 | *** join/#bzflag JeffM (~JeffM@unaffiliated/jeffm2501) |
| 16:32.50 | *** mode/#bzflag [+v JeffM] by ChanServ |
| 17:21.27 | *** join/#bzflag bier_ (~bier@pD9F8F440.dip.t-dialin.net) |
| 19:21.28 | *** join/#bzflag ashvala (~ashvala@unaffiliated/ashvala) |
| 21:00.38 | *** join/#bzflag Delusional (~delusiona@pool-108-17-117-49.pitbpa.fios.verizon.net) |
| 21:00.39 | *** join/#bzflag Delusional (~delusiona@unaffiliated/delusional) |
| 22:06.13 | *** join/#bzflag ashvala (~ashvala@unaffiliated/ashvala) |
| 22:16.58 | *** join/#bzflag allejo (~allejo@cpe-76-90-186-178.socal.res.rr.com) |
| 22:27.50 | *** join/#bzflag apeman_ (~apeman@115-188-244-191.jetstream.xtra.co.nz) |