Well, I had lost my intenet connection for a week, so I only have access to my mail at work (so: no forum, no IRC)
I know I havn't been as active in Wesnoth dev as I wanted to recently, but I'm doing my best to still work on stuff, provide code, monitor forums, get patches in and get new coders in. This is the first time I hear of it so some stuff might have been discussed already. I don't really like the idea.... I'll try to elaborate a little
Currently we have an ad-hoc system, based partly on prior precedents which clearly has not worked well, as the recent controversy on the Soulshooter's renaming illustrated.
No, I don't think it illustrates that. We had a dev that went a little overboard and did a change many people care for, and the change was reverted and another name taken. No big deal. This happens from time to time in wesnoth, and is a sign that our community is healthy. So far our decisions have been taken by the following process * Someone does the stuff * Nobody protest or alternatively * Somone does the stuff * Some people protest * the stuff is tweaked, discussion takes place, everybody is happy in the end when ideas have been rejected, the process was more like * Someone does the stuff * There is a loud uprorar * Stuff is reverted that last bit is usually followed by the person doing the same thin totally differently in a more acceptable way. This process is not formal, it doesn't have a central authority that has "the power" But it works well, And an occasional tension between a couple of devs every 6 month is not what I count as a problem. Seeing how many of us are currently working on wesnoth, I think we are doing pretty well, and I'm afraid any central decision committee will only prevent the first step (someone actually doing the stuff) from taking place. To put it differently, what drives wesnoth are the people feeling free to break things. Its normal that from time to time, that breakage leads to a bit of controversy, and I don't think this warrants the need for sucha committee...
A couple of days ago several developers had a discussion on IRC about > the method by which we decide on some major decisions affecting the > esthetic aspects of the game. In particular, issues such as naming > units, unit descriptions, and historical aspects on the game, have > no defined process as to who makes decisions on these issues.
Well, so the committee would we be limited to the universe, unit naming etc... there has been little going on on that front and the most that happened there was done by Turin who is the only one who tried to rationalize the universe and make something coherent of wesnoth's history and geography. So I think he should not only be in. (Caveat, I havn't discussed with Turin. As I said, I have no access to the internet) Actually I think it would be better to have a "Universe team" like we have a "Art team" a "Balance team" that would be closer to the way things have been done so far, and wouldn't raise the issue of leadership which doesn't need to be done. I think we do need someone to take care of the universe, not a steering committee.
_______________________________________________ Wesnoth-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
