Re: Re: [tsc-devel] Assistant lead position rotation

datahead | Fri, 09 Jun 2017 04:37:31 UTC

> ...ok, I've been doing a lot of thinking, and I'd like to volunteer to be assistant lead.

Kirbyfan64, thank you for stepping up.  It is good to hear we can still keep the project going.  I was not eager to see discussions about sunsetting the project before.

> He will still be aroúnd for some changes to TSC, but won't be merging pull requests or managing issues. 

It is not impossible that I might help out a little on occasion, but it is not at all guaranteed.  It is of course also possible that I wouldn't be able to find any time at all, as xet7 suggested.  I can't be responsible for it anymore.

> A nice description of TSC's current state. Regarding rewrite, I will support whatever the rest decides. I have no right to make a decision without contributing.

Quintus, as I implied before, if a complete rewrite offers you better motivation to stay deeply involved in TSC after you finish law school (and if you are willing to drive this rewrite), I would support it.  I would otherwise support an incremental rewrite.  The effort to start from scratch is so large, that it will take a lot of time and dedication.  It has been taking a lot of time for me to write my own game in Unity, a game engine.

For an incremental rewrite, the most logical strategy is targeting modules that cause us the most grief (and that are feasible to improve) to get immediate payback.  We may never end up rewriting all modules, but we can at least clean up the things that cause us the most trouble.  This brings immediate development benefits.

We definitely would want to get release 2.1 out, or the work that Quintus, Kirbyfan64, and I did will essentially go to waste.  I'd still really like to get my Army boss changes in, but other than that I am fine with a feature freeze.  Hopefully more releases can follow.

Once we attain a release, we need to focus on getting it into more Linux distributions, or we will never be noticed.  Being noticed as a project is what ultimately drives further contributors and new team members, which keeps the project from dying.  We probably should hunt down people who helped out with Linux packaging in the past and also see if any of our team members have time to do some of the work.  We might explore other distribution venues besides standard Linux distributions, too.

For future releases, we need not to put so much into them at once.  This release has both the Cegui upgrades and SFML swapout, which when combined with pre-existing features introduced a lot of bugs at once.  I stand by my suggestion to introduce a couple features like secret exits and the army boss so that we could do something fun other than API upgrades, but I really think the CEGUI and SFML upgrades should have been in different releases.