Ashley, please respond.

New releases and general discussions.

Post » Tue Oct 27, 2009 4:51 pm

Ashley. I'm sure it isn't intentionally rude, but it comes off that way.

The other plugin developers I've spoken to in chat seem on board.
If the answer is no, please respond as such, instead of ignoring the post completely.


[quote="Sslaxx":dzkydly8]Please note the following (about the Construct source code proper).

:arrow: If the terms of the Prof-UIS license is stopping you from releasing the entire source code, then this is a violation.
:arrow: You cannot choose to not release source code because it "is messy" or otherwise personally disagreeable. This is also a violation.[/quote:dzkydly8]

Personally, I know nothing about the licensing issues. I just want to help the project get back on it's feet.

I don't want dev credits, or a red name tag. I just see this as a way to reduce the workload. I don't want to see construct fade away before 1.0, and I'm not alone in my concern this is the way things are headed.
Spriter Dev
B
88
S
21
G
12
Posts: 3,240
Reputation: 16,486

Post » Tue Oct 27, 2009 9:08 pm

[quote="Sslaxx":3f412jlb]Please note the following (about the Construct source code proper).

:arrow: If the terms of the Prof-UIS license is stopping you from releasing the entire source code, then this is a violation.
:arrow: You cannot choose to not release source code because it "is messy" or otherwise personally disagreeable. This is also a violation.[/quote:3f412jlb]

I doubt that that would be much of an issue since most of that code is obfuscated, and that that applies to the main program, more than plugs. (wow lotta thats)

I think the bigger problem might come from the use of student license's
Image Image
B
161
S
48
G
91
Posts: 7,359
Reputation: 67,273

Post » Wed Oct 28, 2009 12:26 am

The Prof-UIS license does not apply to plugins or the runtime because they do not use any Prof-UIS code at all.

As for the idea - well, yes, this is how open source projects are meant to work, so anyone can code and contribute - I would encourage it more, but I'm afraid I just don't have much time these days. It is a good idea. It would be very useful to have people debugging the code to point the devs to particular lines of code that are at fault, or even just reviewing code to hunt down potential problems. However, most of the code in Construct right now is pretty messy and overall badly organised, so I would prefer to wait until Construct 2 to take a more structured, organised approach to these "development technician" roles. (it might also be nice for people relatively new to coding to get project experience)

As for how this kind of project would really work, I see it a bit more like this. Changing code in a project with 100,000+ lines of code can be very difficult and have unexpected repercussions, even for the original developers! So a role of reviewing code for potential (or actual) problems, since a second pair of eyes can really help, debugging code relating to currently open bugs and finding the problems in the code, and writing patches for plugins, would be useful. Maybe we could also give some people developer access to the SVN and see how "third party" patches go. But given my experience on Construct 0.x, lax coding standards can really cause big headaches later on, so I would be very strict and picky and would probably reject code submissions outright if they don't comply exactly. This might seem harsh, but an open bug you've had your eye on might have been closed by now if we'd been stricter on this ourselves in 0.x.

Anyways, it's an interesting discussion (sorry I arrived late). Any thoughts on that?
Scirra Founder
B
359
S
214
G
72
Posts: 22,952
Reputation: 178,630

Post » Wed Oct 28, 2009 12:36 am

we would have to defiantly make a coding conventions wiki that people must read and adhere to bey all devs. I did download all the of the source and have been looking through it. Conventions need to be defined and adhered to. such as brackets get their own line, code must be well commented so on and so forth.
B
5
S
2
G
4
Posts: 632
Reputation: 2,829

Post » Wed Oct 28, 2009 1:10 am

That's nothing wrong Ashley. The PCSX2 project is the same way, if your code doesn't comply to the standards, it will not be used. If you submit code to the SVN and it is sloppy, it will be reverted. etc etc
B
3
G
3
Posts: 42
Reputation: 959

Post » Wed Oct 28, 2009 2:56 am

Yes Ash. I agree with pretty much everything you said
[quote="I":21zqxd5w]An agreed upon method of submitting bugfixes, which can later be reviewed by the devs and utilized as is, edited, or at the very least, used to find the source of a bug.

There can be minimum guidelines for commenting, and of course for the methods of submission.
Any contributions would be submitted with no implied promise of either an acceleration in development, or a response from the developers.[/quote:21zqxd5w]

Those lines I wanted to emphasize. I would imagine it's disheartening to look at the bug tracker in it's current state when you have almost no time time to work on it. Having an extra set of expectations for "helpers" wouldn't really be helping you.

I don't have much time to work on this, either. But I would gladly do some of it; at the very minimum, anything I've already found. And I can take a peek from time to time on the bug tracker to see if there's anything I might be able to take a look at. I'm not sure what kind of time the other plugin devs have, but between the 4 or 5 of us, I think it could really add up.

I think it's important we make very clear guidelines for commenting, so there isn't additional time wasted deciphering our code and what it's supposed to do. When submitting the code there should also be guidelines for how to submit, and what to include- for instance, a small report that states the filename and line number where the relevant code is located, why we think it doesn't work, and if the solution is not obvious, a suggestion for a change in code.

Also, I think when having trouble finding a particular bug, we can post to the plugin forum, and help eachother out. I think this could end up being very constructive. [size=30:21zqxd5w] and yes I did that on purpose[/size:21zqxd5w]
Spriter Dev
B
88
S
21
G
12
Posts: 3,240
Reputation: 16,486

Post » Wed Oct 28, 2009 12:19 pm

Having contributed to commercial software, I have seen the benefits of a very strict lead programmer, and I don't think anyone would mind if their code was rejected, as long as the standards required were clear and spelt out in advance.
Good luck with whatever route you take.

My concern in this thread is what Lucid meant by the road he thinks Construct is taking.
I haven't been on here often enough recently to know precisely what he means, so I'm just wondering if there's been something said on this subject recently that I've missed.
We all know how real life can get in the way of our various hobbies, but is there something more to it than that?

Personally, I'd like to see the Devs showing the same sort of passion for Construct as Lucid does (maybe they did in the beginning, and are maybe a little burnt out. Been there, done that.).

Maybe 3 Devs isn't enough on a project this size any more.
Would MAME have been as successful as it's been if Nicola had decided to keep his code to himself.

I submit my vote for LUCID to become the 4th Dev (should he wish to do so), and I would like to see at least half a dozen Devs involved in this project, although it would still require someone at the helm to maintain the required standards.

I really hope Construct doesn't fade away.
As a C++ coder for many years, I'd get over it, but I really like what they've accomplised here, and I'd like to see them at least see it out to version 1.0

Krush.
B
2
S
2
G
3
Posts: 406
Reputation: 2,062

Post » Wed Oct 28, 2009 4:38 pm

[quote="KrushBrother":3t6f3yo3]Personally, I'd like to see the Devs showing the same sort of passion for Construct as Lucid does (maybe they did in the beginning, and are maybe a little burnt out. Been there, done that.)[/quote:3t6f3yo3]
I definitely still have the passion, but just no time these days, and I think the same goes for the other devs too. At some point in the future I will have time again, and this is why I am laying down plans for Construct 2 when the time comes in the future. However, burnout is a bit of an issue here as well, since when Construct was started - and all the most important organisation and architectural decisions were made - we were basically all n00bs with hardly any experience. Mistakes were made, and working on Construct now is unnecessarily difficult, which makes it a pain to do coding, which makes the little time we have less effective. That's why I'm keen to wrap up 0.x and get started on the next version - I know we could do so much better now.
Scirra Founder
B
359
S
214
G
72
Posts: 22,952
Reputation: 178,630

Previous

Return to Construct Classic Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests