David Philippi schrieb: > Hello, > > I just thought a bit about this topic again. We're at the start of a new > unstable tree and the bars to get in new code are low - why not also for > campaigns? My idea would be to freely include anything which is rather > complete, not braindead and maintained (using new terrain letter should be > sufficient sign right now). > But those inclusions are not permanent. As we progress to a new stable > release > the bars are put higher and higher. Campaigns which are not well maintained > and e.g. unplayable for more then one release go out again. Once we feel that > we're getting close to a new stable, the actual evaluation will occur. Now we > have the history of how well the campaign was maintained during the unstable > phase and probably some feedback on them. > Having lots of campaigns is a high maintainance burden? Yes and no. If we > switch them in and out without lots of discussion there's not so much of it. > If a campaign is stable and playable at the point where we reach a new stable > version it's safe. A stable version will by design not be changed in a way > which makes the campaign unplayable. If it's not kept up to date for the > changes of the next unstable tree - out it goes. > > Comments? > Yes, I got some comments how we could do some things and which things we should keep in mind when doing this: 1) Before including it we do at least need one vote from a dev stating that it should go in. This is to make sure that the quality is at least acceptable. Otherwise well maintained but *bad* campaigns can get in, too. IMO it should also be at least some sign of quality when a campaign is shipped with mainline. 2) Everything should be ready for translations. This means it should not be extra work by someone not being the campaign author/maintainer be needed to get translations work. In other words: it will help authors to participate in wescamp-i18n since then all the content will be ready for translations... (textdomains set and strings marked as translateable) 3) The campaign should not clash with the existing Wesnoth history or it should clearly state that it is some "alternative" history, maybe from some different perspective. 4) At least at the moment of inclusion we should have someone saying that he/she will maintain it. Otherwise we would be including and removing stuff *very* frequently. Regarding this topic we did talk about something in the irc-chan yesterday.
Regarding the maintance burden, there was a nice comment by esr in the irc yesterday: Why not "recruit" some "general purpose campaign maintaners" that step in when noone else is maintaining the content. This includes further development of the campaigns even with heavy changes. The idea behind this is: as long as the author is activly working on it and fixing bugs it will be his job, once the campaign gets "abandoned" by the author others can change it, even with extreme changes. Currently most people are afraid of doing extreme changes to the campaigns because it could clash with the intention of the author. If we had some "general purpose campaign maintaners" they could adjust difficulty levels and work on general fixes when something is needed but noone activly maintains the campaign anymore though we like the campaign in general. Just have a look at http://wesnoth.debian.net/%23wesnoth-dev-2007-04-06.log for a reference about what was said in there. I think that is quite a reasonable aproach. In general I really do welcome making it easier to get content included. As long as we have some clear rules about removing them once they don't fit out "needs" anymore (this means: broken and/or not well maintained (balancing, ...), arts and sounds/music too bad, ...) I really like this aproach. And we should consider to offer svn access to the authors so that they could directly take the job of maintaining the campaigns. Some should already have experience in this from wescamp. Greets, Nils Kneuper aka Ivanovic PS: What about the other content available (mainly eras and mappacks)? Should we change our policy for these, too, or should we only change it regarding campaigns? _______________________________________________ Wesnoth-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
