[crossfire] Leaderships(s?) (was Re: Platform statement)

[Lalo Martins]

quoth Nicolas Weeger as of Tue, 13 Jan 2009 19:17:18 +0100:
> - content leader => handles the story part of the game, maps that are ok
> or not story wise, and such
> - gameplay leader => handles combat mechanisms, has a say on quest
> rewards and such, works on non combat stuff, ...
> - technical leader => ensures needs of content/gameplay leaders are met,
> and maybe planifies development and such
>
> PS: to reply to someone's mail, no, I don't want to be technical leader
> as long as we don't have a gameplay leader - and even so, I'm not sure
> I'd accept.

Okay, sorry, but this is not going to work.

For years, we had just one project leader.  That worked in its time, then 
as Mark got busy with real life, things slowed down.

Recently it has been proposed to have separate leaders for code and 
content.  A volunteer appeared for code, but then the need for a content 
leader was played; quite reasonably, one volunteer claimed he didn't want 
to go far as code leader unless there was a content leader.  So I 
volunteered to take the job.

But now there's a third position that has to be filled as well?  And even 
then we may find we still don't have a coding leader?

Come on, people, we're getting nowhere this way.

At this point in time, I don't think we even have enough people working 
on it to be talking about leadership.  These are the important questions 
that need to be asked with regards to people resources:

- Who will make content releases?  (me, I guess.)
- Who will make server releases?
- Who will make gtk client releases?
- Who will make java client releases?
- Who will fix content bugs?
- Who will fix server bugs?
- Who will fix gtk client bugs?
- Who will fix java client bugs?

Only after those are answered, are we prepared to talk about adding new 
content, new features, or even massive rewrites.  Oh sure, we could just 
declare 1.x abandoned; but considering all the cool stuff we have in svn, 
that would be a waste and a pity.

All right then, to Gorokh with this.  Here's my new proposal.

Short term: I'm naming myself "release manager" for the 1.12 mini-
project.  I'll get a release out, code and content.  The extra work in 
carrying the code release through childbirth may (probably will) mean 
missing the March 1st deadline, but I'll give it my best.  I will *not* 
attempt to release clients, though.  If someone wants to coordinate a 
client release, I'd be very happy and lend my support.  (Kevin?)

Medium term: I think the best thing to do, as far as separation of work 
is concerned, is to view this as a number of separate sub-projects:

- Server (code and content) for 1.x
- GTK/glade client (based on v2 I assume)
- Java client
- Gridarta for CF
- Server (code and content) for 2.x (possibly later)

Each of those should have someone taking responsibility.  (Gridarta 
already does, and the Java client unofficially does too.)  The necessity 
of a "master overseer" over the whole project is arguable; I think the 
sub-project leaders can work things out between them.

But for now, let's concentrate on a release.  My hope is that the work 
involved in doing that will wake us up, and that the right people for 
each position will rise up in the process.

Frankly... this whole thing is silly.  Free/Open Source projects aren't 
representative democracies; it makes no sense to be arguing about who 
will lead what when there's work to do and nobody to lead.  Let's go get 
this release out.  Please.

best,
                                               Lalo Martins
-- 
      So many of our dreams at first seem impossible,
       then they seem improbable, and then, when we
       summon the will, they soon become inevitable.
                           -----
                  http://lalomartins.info/
GNU: never give up freedom              http://www.gnu.org/