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

[Nicolas Weeger]

So, tell me:
- what should chaos attack do?
- how are wc and ac related?
- what is the meaning of "speed 1"?
- "I made a map with this and that reward with those statistics, can I put it 
into SVN?" <- who will decide?
- "I made a patch to enable players to create items from other items through 
alchemy, is it ok to be put into SVN?" <- who will decide?
- "I made a patch so poison attacks aren't a one shot, but actually poison the 
player for 1 to 10 seconds" <- who will decide to put that into SVN?
- "here is a pickaxe to destroy walls, can I put it into SVN?"

(not necessarily "what does it do right now?", but "what should it do in the 
ideal game we're making?")


As you said, this isn't a democracy, and latest discussions (and the lack of 
conclusions) should show that we need someone to actually decide when 
needed - so a gameplay leader, and a content leader, both are needed.

And I don't worry for technical leadership - there are enough people willing 
to code for Crossfire, besides the code is enough for now for most things 
planned in the next releases.


Nicolas


Le mardi 13 janvier 2009, Lalo Martins a écrit :
> 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



-- 
http://nicolas.weeger.org [Petit site d'images, de textes, de code, bref de 
l'aléatoire !]
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://mailman.metalforge.org/pipermail/crossfire/attachments/20090114/84193a87/attachment.pgp