Hi all, On 25 Dec 2008, at 18:57, Dennis Schridde wrote: >> BTW, I like EvilGuru's ambitious plan, if for no other reason than >> that it sounds awesome and motivating. > Sounds awesome: Yes. > Motivating: For some time, yes. > I just feel we will get stuck again in a situation like we have now. > Every now > and then someone writes a little bit of code when they have time, > and the > ambitious plans rot half finished.
Who cares if I takes a long time. 2.2 is for the long haul. Chances are a lot of hardcore fans won't like 3.0 (or 2.3 if you prefer) and will want to stick with it. All of these sub-projects and ideas fit together extremely well, and are all fronted by different people. I can't work on the terrain branch as I have no idea how it works. So if we schedule it for 2.3/2.4 I will have nothing to do (why write betawidget if it is still releases away from seeing the light of day). Lua conversion is actually almost finished, as it is an automated process. Gerard seems to have made very good progress with it as well. (In that, give it a month or so and I would like to merge betawidget with it, as we also make use of Lua.) An ambitious plan which needs as much manpower as possible will also serve will for attractive new developers. People don't want to maintain someone elses work, they want to make it theirs, do their own thing with it. Porting isn't that fun; fixing bugs is not fun; rewriting the terrain rendering or replacing the scripting language *is*. Getting more people interested is important, as we're all busier than we were a year ago. So I still say that we tag 2.2 (with the intention of maintaining it for as long as people want to play it) and then go our own way with 3.0. It also allows us to bump up the hardware requirements a lot easier. Regards, Freddie. _______________________________________________ Warzone-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
