Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

PCGen Board of Directors Meeting (Sept 27, 2010)

Expand Messages
  • Andrew Maitland
    [19:00] I have 7pm local PDT, is everyone ready to begin? [19:00] Sure [19:00] *bangs gavel* Welcome to the
    Message 1 of 1 , Sep 27, 2010
      [19:00] <@[Chair]Andrew> I have 7pm local PDT, is everyone ready to begin?
      [19:00] <jamesd[Code_SB]> Sure
      [19:00] <@[Chair]Andrew> *bangs gavel* Welcome to the PCGen Board of Directors meeting for
      September, the 27th of 2010.
      [19:00] <@[Chair]Andrew> Our Agenda tonight is:
      [19:01] <@[Chair]Andrew> 1 - Team Reports by Silverbacks and Seconds
      [19:01] <@[Chair]Andrew> 2 - Status of Sub Projects
      [19:01] <@[Chair]Andrew> 3 - Readiness of 5.16.4RC1
      [19:02] <@[Chair]Andrew> 4 - Open Discussion [All observers allowed to participate]
      [19:02] <@[Chair]Andrew> I'll begin with the Admin Team
      [19:03] <@[Chair]Andrew> Trackers - David Bender has reported completion of the Trackers I put up.
      [19:04] <@[Chair]Andrew> I'd request that all teams do a complete review and make sure everything
      appears to be complete. Docs I believe are still awaiting port.
      [19:04] <[PR]Maredudd> That is correct Andrew.
      [19:04] <@[Chair]Andrew> Eric - are you able to review the Docs and just make batches of Eight
      tracker for valid ones in the Admin Tracker, and I can ask David to port those.
      [19:04] <@[Chair]Andrew> ?
      [19:05] <@[Chair]Andrew> [Eight valid trackers to port in one admin tracker, makes David feel like
      progress is made, keeps him happy]
      [19:05] <@[Chair]Andrew> [You can use the simple template Tom and I used for him ;) ]
      [19:06] <[PR]Maredudd> I'll have to look at how that works. I'm mostly afraid that detail will be
      lost in the port.
      [19:06] <[PR]Maredudd> The trackers can be ported over at any time one-for-one.
      [19:07] <@[Chair]Andrew> We link back if need be, but David has been good about moving the details over.
      [19:07] <@[Chair]Andrew> So, all the trackers are still valid then? If so, I can ask David to move
      them over copying them verbatim then.
      [19:07] <[PR]Maredudd> Well, I'm not sure how the 8 to 1 works so let me review what you did.
      [19:07] <@[Chair]Andrew> Cool
      [19:07] <[PR]Maredudd> Yes. All the trackers are still valid.
      [19:08] <@[Chair]Andrew> Bite Sized Trackers, makes the guy happy. Okay then, moving on
      [19:08] <@[Chair]Andrew> Web Team - Anestis reports no activity on his end. Tony was mentioning a
      trial and review he's done. Paul brought up a nice Forum/Email solution in the form of FUDForum.
      [19:09] <@[Chair]Andrew> I've tried to set up the FUDForum on our test server and soundly hit a
      brick wall. I've asked Anestis to assist and I'll have to report back later what is going on.
      [19:10] <@[Chair]Andrew> I think it's a SQLite we set up for another test, but again, it's all
      speculation at this point.
      [19:11] <@[Chair]Andrew> Any questions for Admin before I go onto Release and let James take over?
      [19:12] <jamesd[Code_SB]> none here
      [19:12] <[Arch_SB]thpr> none here either
      [19:12] <[PR]Maredudd> None here.
      [19:13] <@[Chair]Andrew> Release - James would you care to comment on the status of the Branch and
      Trunk releases? Then feel free to roll into the Code report. :)
      [19:13] <jamesd[Code_SB]> ok can do
      [19:14] <jamesd[Code_SB]> As discussed in the last meeting we are targeting a 5.16.4 release
      [19:14] <jamesd[Code_SB]> This will be mostly focused on data changes, particularly the inclusion of
      an alpha Advanced Players Guide set
      [19:14] <jamesd[Code_SB]> From what I can see that is running really well and the aim is to get a
      release candidate out next weekend
      [19:15] <jamesd[Code_SB]> In the trunk we still want to get a few bugs fixed before putting out the
      next alpha release there (5.17.4)
      [19:15] <jamesd[Code_SB]> no eta currently
      [19:16] <jamesd[Code_SB]> any questions on releases?
      [19:16] <[PR]Maredudd> A note on the APG: The basic structure seems to be there but there is a lot
      of bonus/effect that isn't there yet, Will it be there next weekend?
      [19:16] <@[Chair]Andrew> Sounds good to me. APG is doing good, and hopefully it'll be ready for an
      alpha inclusion on schedule.
      [19:16] <jamesd[Code_SB]> Andrew?
      [19:16] <@[Chair]Andrew> It's a lot of work, but I'm hoping to get most of the work in place.
      [19:17] <@[Chair]Andrew> I'll be asking Stefan to assist as there are a LOT of abilities to cover in
      this regard
      [19:17] <@[Chair]Andrew> Along with source pages :)
      [19:17] <[PR]Maredudd> Ok. Once 5.16.4 goes out, how difficult will it be to put out an OOC to add
      the stuff that might be missed?
      [19:17] <@[Chair]Andrew> Not hard at all
      [19:17] <[PR]Maredudd> Ok.
      [19:17] <@[Chair]Andrew> as long as we don't change file names, the OOC should overwrite what we do
      [19:18] <[PR]Maredudd> Good point.
      [19:18] <[PR]Maredudd> And new files will be added.
      [19:18] <jamesd[Code_SB]> Yes please get any intended file name changes done before the RC :)
      [19:19] <@[Chair]Andrew> The important stuff is in place, and the core is fully supporting the APG.
      Which is the whole point of the 5.16.4 release. I'll give Stefan glares if he does any filename
      changes on us... ;)
      [19:19] <jamesd[Code_SB]> Oh and I should also emphasise that if there are any changes to the branch
      after the RC is done, then another RC will be required
      [19:20] <jamesd[Code_SB]> Yep, it really is looking good, I am very impressed by how quickly this
      huge source has been implemented and the level of feedback we are getting despite the difficulty in
      trying it out
      [19:20] <@[Chair]Andrew> Yes, let's try and stick to the plan and just use the RC as a bug catch
      week only.
      [19:20] <[PR]Maredudd> So once the RC goes out only approved changes go in. Others will wait until
      the final . . .
      [19:20] <@[Chair]Andrew> exactly
      [19:20] <[PR]Maredudd> After the final that is.
      [19:20] <jamesd[Code_SB]> nope, any change and we get a new RC - no room for mistakes this time
      [19:21] <[PR]Maredudd> I was assuming that any changes after the final would go into an OOC, if
      required.
      [19:21] <@[Chair]Andrew> Approved changes meaning BUGs, which prompts another RC, so mainly only
      SHOWSTOPPERS at that point.
      [19:21] <jamesd[Code_SB]> Yep that is correct
      [19:22] <@[Chair]Andrew> okay, unless there are further questions, let's move onto the Code Report.
      James?
      [19:22] <jamesd[Code_SB]> Sure
      [19:22] <jamesd[Code_SB]> code report
      [19:22] <jamesd[Code_SB]> 3 bugs raised and 3 resolved since the last meeting
      [19:22] <jamesd[Code_SB]> We are aiming to get a few more bugs sorted in the next fortnight
      hopefully clearing the way for the 5.17.4 release
      [19:22] <jamesd[Code_SB]> Currently there is a failing unit test in hudson which needs fixing -
      hopefully should be sorted tonight also
      [19:23] <jamesd[Code_SB]> There has been movement on a number of the sub-projects but there is a
      separate section for that
      [19:23] <jamesd[Code_SB]> So I'll leave those for later
      [19:23] <jamesd[Code_SB]> Any questions?
      [19:23] <[PR]Maredudd> None here.
      [19:24] <[OGL]Nylanfs> None from me
      [19:24] <@[Chair]Andrew> none here.
      [19:24] <[Arch_SB]thpr> I think the issues on the character tests should also be mentioned - those
      would also hold up 5.17.4, correct?
      [19:24] <jamesd[Code_SB]> Yes while they aren't in the hudson builds they will gate a release
      [19:24] <@[Chair]Andrew> are any of the character tests failing currently?
      [19:25] <jamesd[Code_SB]> Again I'll look into those
      [19:25] <[Arch_SB]thpr> yes 5 of them
      [19:25] <jamesd[Code_SB]> and see if it is a code problem or a data change
      [19:25] <[Arch_SB]thpr> as a result of the armor changes in the game modes from August
      [19:25] <@[Chair]Andrew> ick, it may be my fault then.
      [19:25] <@[Chair]Andrew> Okay, yeah, my fault. I'll work on fixing those
      [19:25] <[Arch_SB]thpr> 4 of the 5 seem innocent, the last one I'm not sure
      [19:26] <jamesd[Code_SB]> I'll chat with you and Tom after this Andrew
      [19:26] <@[Chair]Andrew> okay, I'll stick around.
      [19:26] <@[Chair]Andrew> Anything else Tom? Otherwise, you're up next :)
      [19:27] <[Arch_SB]thpr> nothing more on that topic
      [19:27] <[Arch_SB]thpr> Arch has been slow, so no news to report. Current focus will be 5.17.4
      [19:27] *** cpmeister_______ has joined #pcgen
      [19:27] <[Arch_SB]thpr> any questions for Arch?
      [19:27] <[PR]Maredudd> None here.
      [19:28] <@[Chair]Andrew> Fast report :) None here
      [19:28] <@[Chair]Andrew> Hi Connor
      [19:28] <cpmeister_______> Hi all
      [19:28] <[OGL]Nylanfs> I like the UI work, that count? :)
      [19:28] <cpmeister_______> just popping in
      [19:28] <@[Chair]Andrew> We'll be getting to the UI stuff in a moment, you able to stick around a
      bit Connor for that?
      [19:29] <cpmeister_______> yep
      [19:29] <@[Chair]Andrew> Cool. Okay Eric, anything for the PR team? ;)
      [19:29] <[PR]Maredudd> Just a few items.
      [19:30] <[PR]Maredudd> The Licensing REview has been completed on 101 1st Level Spells and the set
      is ready for Data Review. I've passed it on to Chris.
      [19:31] <[PR]Maredudd> Word qwent out to the PCGen lists and to Paizo's list on the Ultimate Magic
      Playtest Round 1 OOC set just four days after the Playtest started! Good job!
      [19:33] <[PR]Maredudd> Finally, the OOC for The Laboratory of the Mad Wizard Shadmar is going out to
      the publisher for review tonight. If we get something back quickly enough maybe we can move it into
      the 5.16.4 RC1 release.
      [19:33] <[PR]Maredudd> Thats all I have unless Paul has something to add, or if there are any questions.
      [19:34] <@[Chair]Andrew> I'll add great effort by all involved in a speedy turn around getting the
      Playtest out so quickly. Especially since it's only running two weeks total.
      [19:34] <[OGL]Nylanfs> I cleared Serpent's Skull player's guide, Sargava, the Lost Colony and Hart
      of the Jungle, although Chris kicked that one back to Stefan because it's missing one or two things.
      [19:34] <[PR]Maredudd> Does anyone know if the other CG software got playtest files out?
      [19:35] <[OGL]Nylanfs> BTW I don't think that the Ultimate Magic playtests should go into regular
      releases
      [19:36] <[PR]Maredudd> I don't believe that is the intention Paul. The set can be left were it is
      until the book is released.
      [19:36] <[OGL]Nylanfs> I haven't seen any word, but I haven't been looking
      [19:36] <[OGL]Nylanfs> K, just stating an opinion :)
      [19:36] <[PR]Maredudd> Then the set should be pulled in favor of the final version.
      [19:37] <jamesd[Code_SB]> Sounds like a good approach to me
      [19:37] <[OGL]Nylanfs> I would just leave it at a OOC release
      [19:38] <@[Chair]Andrew> yeah, that's the idea. OOC only.
      [19:38] <[PR]Maredudd> We can place it in thesame status as the PF RPG Beta Playtest set.
      [19:39] <[PR]Maredudd> If there are no more questions or comments, PR is done.
      [19:39] <@[Chair]Andrew> Thanks Eric and Paul.
      [19:39] <@[Chair]Andrew> I'll do a quick report for Content
      [19:41] <@[Chair]Andrew> Docs - I'll be opening a tracker to update the Paizo materials, we still
      list on the Beta Version of Pathfinder ;)
      [19:41] <@[Chair]Andrew> OS - No activity here
      [19:42] <@[Chair]Andrew> Data - Well, I'll repeat myself, we've gotten a few new sources of Paizo
      into the Alpha folder for 5.16. It's nice to see a bunch of support here.
      [19:42] <@[Chair]Andrew> Eric, anything you want to add for Docs?
      [19:43] <[PR]Maredudd> Only that I am beginning to see more free time so I'll be getting back to
      some doc work soon.
      [19:43] <@[Chair]Andrew> excellent, unless there are any Content questions, we'll move on to the
      next agenda item
      [19:43] <@[Chair]Andrew> 2 - Status of Sub Projects
      [19:43] <@[Chair]Andrew> 2a - UI Test as requested by James
      [19:44] <@[Chair]Andrew> 2b - UI Progress
      [19:44] <@[Chair]Andrew> 2c - CDOM overhaul / Arch
      [19:44] <@[Chair]Andrew> 2d - Template Engine Integration
      [19:44] <@[Chair]Andrew> 2e - Merger of the Sub-projects
      [19:44] <@[Chair]Andrew> I think that's all the current active sub projects, James and Conor, the
      floor is yours with the first two items.
      [19:45] <jamesd[Code_SB]> Well actually the first one is a request for feedback from the BoD
      [19:45] <jamesd[Code_SB]> Who had a chance to kick the tyres? What were your thoughts on how it is
      looking?
      [19:45] <jamesd[Code_SB]> Would you prefer it to the current UI?
      [19:46] <[Arch_SB]thpr> Unfortunately, I haven't had a chance to test it
      [19:46] <@[Chair]Andrew> I got minimal time to play with it, I like it overall, several things still
      need to be implemented to make it a wholy satisfying replacement.
      [19:47] <[OGL]Nylanfs> I like it, I made a suggestion on the skills (and it would probably apply to
      the feats and abilities also)
      [19:47] <jamesd[Code_SB]> @Andrew Is that on existing screens, or just that we need to implement the
      missing ones?
      [19:48] <@[Chair]Andrew> Existing screens
      [19:49] <[OGL]Nylanfs> One question though, where did the kit selection go?
      [19:49] <jamesd[Code_SB]> Yes that was a good point Paul. That was the first level with spare points
      should be the default selection for the skills tab when you display it
      [19:49] <cpmeister_______> not implemented yet :)
      [19:49] <jamesd[Code_SB]> @Andrew anything specific you want to raise now - just in case we have
      missed it?
      [19:50] <@[Chair]Andrew> sure
      [19:50] <@[Chair]Andrew> Ease of Use - Stats, no tab or return to get the next entry
      [19:50] <jamesd[Code_SB]> noted
      [19:50] <@[Chair]Andrew> Skills - Ranks aren't increasing with arrows
      [19:50] <@[Chair]Andrew> I'm missing a step I guess, but it's not being nice to me. :(
      [19:51] <jamesd[Code_SB]> That is most likely going to be that no level was selected
      [19:51] <@[Chair]Andrew> probably. Also, the skills all show -5 as the total, they aren't grabbing
      the stat changes
      [19:52] <@[Chair]Andrew> @James - should default to level 1, or earliest level with skills remaining
      if no level is selected. IMHO otherwise you'll have confusion, OR at least some indicator a level
      must be selected.
      [19:52] <[OGL]Nylanfs> Actually it would apply to any of the tabs that have a selection, it should
      always default to the earliest selection availible, ie feats, class abilities etc.
      [19:52] <@[Chair]Andrew> nothing grabs my attention to the levels
      [19:53] <@[Chair]Andrew> Unfortunately that's all the testing I had time before. I'll give it a more
      thorough thrashing later for ya.
      [19:54] <@[Chair]Andrew> Did we want to get the community involved at this stage, or wait till we
      have everything near readiness?
      [19:54] <cpmeister_______> the feedback is much appreciated
      [19:54] <cpmeister_______> but it only reminds me that I still have work to do before it should be
      ready to the public
      [19:54] <@[Chair]Andrew> Sidenote - I've missed the UI commits Connor...
      [19:55] <jamesd[Code_SB]> yes I think we should sort out those items first
      [19:55] <cpmeister_______> I've been distracted :(
      [19:55] <[OGL]Nylanfs> I would wait until at least every existing tab is at least represented other
      wise James and Connor will get false positives on the bugs
      [19:55] <@[Chair]Andrew> Okay, when I have a free moment I'll give a better report on findings.
      [19:55] <jamesd[Code_SB]> and please feel free to continue to have a play and send feedback to
      Connor and I, maybe by way of the dev list
      [19:55] <@[Chair]Andrew> Sure, I can do that.
      [19:56] <jamesd[Code_SB]> @Paul, maybe we should put placeholders in for all tabs that just say
      "Coming Soon"
      [19:56] <@[Chair]Andrew> Did you guys want to give a guesstimate on UI progress at this point?
      [19:56] <jamesd[Code_SB]> That way the scope of the project is visible
      [19:56] <jamesd[Code_SB]> No I'd prefer not at this point - lots done but lots to do still
      [19:56] <cpmeister_______> agreed
      [19:57] <[OGL]Nylanfs> Might be a good idea :)
      [19:57] <@[Chair]Andrew> okay, anything else UI before we let Tom give a quickie on his progress in
      the CDOM overhaul? [He's under time constraints tonight]
      [19:58] <cpmeister_______> none here
      [19:58] <jamesd[Code_SB]> Just a thank-you for the feedback
      [19:58] <@[Chair]Andrew> Okay Tom, I know progress has been slow. But where do we stand in the big
      picture for 5.17 CDOM work and it's subprojects?
      [19:59] <[Arch_SB]thpr> So the CHOOSE work is mostly done (a few bugs here and there to work out)
      [19:59] <[Arch_SB]thpr> That leaves the next step to be driving forward that type safety into the
      items dependent on CHOOSE
      [20:00] <[Arch_SB]thpr> That is a bit held up by some interactions with the persistence system
      (think saving to PCG files) and how we currently store information (what does/doesn't need to be
      reproduced on load)
      [20:00] <[Arch_SB]thpr> So there is some cleanup there, and then it will start to store items
      directly rather than in strings
      [20:00] <[Arch_SB]thpr> so hopefully it will help to start cleaning out some of the slower
      comparisons that we have to do
      [20:01] <[Arch_SB]thpr> thoughts or questions?
      [20:01] <@[Chair]Andrew> Yes :_
      [20:02] <@[Chair]Andrew> :) I meant. CHOOSE:ABILITY will we get both implementations this cycle or
      is that going to be 6.2+?
      [20:03] <@[Chair]Andrew> Eric and I encountered issues where having it behave exactly like
      CHOOSE:FEAT would have been extremely useful and easier than clunkier workarounds
      [20:03] <[Arch_SB]thpr> There is only one CHOOSE:ABILITY
      [20:03] <[Arch_SB]thpr> You're asking for CHOOSE:FEAT= which was deprecated
      [20:03] <[Arch_SB]thpr> and has been replaced by a FEAT= primitive
      [20:03] <[Arch_SB]thpr> is that what you're asking about?
      [20:04] <@[Chair]Andrew> Yeah, that's what I'm asking about, CHOOSE:ABILITY|ABILITY= and ABILITYLIST
      or ABILITYSELECTION= I'm not sure which wording we used
      [20:04] <[Arch_SB]thpr> So let's back up a second
      [20:05] <[Arch_SB]thpr> The first argument to CHOOSE is always the type of CHOOSE.
      [20:05] <[Arch_SB]thpr> Today we have CHOOSE:ABILITY|, CHOOSE:FEAT|, and CHOOSE:FEATSELECTION|,
      among many others
      [20:06] <[Arch_SB]thpr> The distinction between FEAT and FEATSELECTION is that FEAT chooses the feat
      (such as "Weapon Focus") and FEATSELECTION chooses both the Feat and the target (such as Weapon
      Focus (Longsword)
      [20:06] <[Arch_SB]thpr> We currently do not have an ABILITYSELECTION, so that is one feature
      request. I understand the request, but that is not the priority at the moment
      [20:07] <[Arch_SB]thpr> I don't want to implement items into some old back-end and do extra work
      that would be eliminated in the next few sets of work that I do in 5.17
      [20:07] <[Arch_SB]thpr> So that's one TODO
      [20:07] <@[Chair]Andrew> fair enough.
      [20:08] <jamesd[Code_SB]> DO we have it trackered in JIRA? Might be a good time to work out the syntax
      [20:08] <[Arch_SB]thpr> The old CHOOSE:FEAT= is now various items, where the first argument is
      always the target type... so if it used to be CHOOSE:FEAT=Weapon Focus, then I believe it would now
      be CHOOSE:WEAPONPROF|FEAT=Weapon Focus
      [20:09] <[Arch_SB]thpr> @James - CHOOSE:ABILITYSELECTION will not require syntax different than
      other CHOOSE tokens
      [20:09] <jamesd[Code_SB]> nice
      [20:09] <[Arch_SB]thpr> actually, I think the above is CHOOSE:WEAPONPROFICIENCY|FEAT=Weapon Focus
      (sorry folks, doing this without reading the docs)
      [20:10] <[Arch_SB]thpr> Anyway, the problem is if things like Weapon Focus are converted to an
      Ability, what do you do?
      [20:10] <@[Chair]Andrew> [Yeah, that's the correct newer version]
      [20:10] <[Arch_SB]thpr> Current answer is probably "panic"
      [20:10] <[Arch_SB]thpr> we didn't have an equivalent for abilities for CHOOSE:FEAT= , and currently
      in the 5.17 branch we do not have one
      [20:11] <[Arch_SB]thpr> So we need something like CHOOSE:WEAPONPROFICIENCY|ABILITY=Abil1
      [20:11] <[Arch_SB]thpr> unforunately that syntax won't work as we need a category
      [20:11] <@[Chair]Andrew> Only it needs the Category
      [20:11] <[Arch_SB]thpr> So the FEAT= or the ABILITY= (whatever it becomes) is called a primitive
      [20:12] <[Arch_SB]thpr> So we need an ABILITY= primitive (and it will work with any of the target
      types - that's the cool feature of the new CHOOSE system)
      [20:12] <[Arch_SB]thpr> So that's the second TODO.
      [20:13] <[Arch_SB]thpr> It's helpful to ask for either "CHOOSE:ABILITYSELECTION" or "The ABILITY=
      primitive" as it will be less confusing than saying it's CHOOSE:ABILITY (which actually functions
      perfectly well)
      [20:13] <[Arch_SB]thpr> The challenge on the ABILITY primitive is that I don't think we've agreed on
      a syntax, so that probably needs to go to the lists even before it can be done
      [20:14] <[Arch_SB]thpr> pardon the long explanation, but hopefully that helps clear up the requested
      features
      [20:15] *** BlackBook has joined #pcgen
      [20:15] <@[Chair]Andrew> Thanks for that Tom. I know you need to go, so I'll keep the rest of my
      questions for another time.
      [20:16] <@[Chair]Andrew> Okay, since Stefan is sleeping, I'll hit his project. The Template Engine.
      [20:17] <[Arch_SB]thpr> have a good evening/afternoon all
      [20:17] <@[Chair]Andrew> He's been looking at it, and will be dedicating several of his upcoming
      free Fridays to solely the Template Engine. He's been indicating satisfaction with what he's
      discovered and hopefully we'll see some good progress here in the very near future.
      [20:17] <@[Chair]Andrew> [Night Tom]
      [20:17] *** [Arch_SB]thpr has quit IRC: Quit: Leaving.
      [20:18] <@[Chair]Andrew> Unless anyone has questions for that, I think we've already answered the 2e
      - Merger of the Sub-projects
      [20:18] <@[Chair]Andrew> Which is Unknown ETA, need to re-evaluate.
      [20:18] <@[Chair]Andrew> Fair Enough estimation?
      [20:18] <jamesd[Code_SB]> Agreed, much as we discussed lats meeting
      [20:18] <[OGL]Nylanfs> Is there a roadmap or wiki for the template engine?
      [20:19] <@[Chair]Andrew> Not at the moment, no.
      [20:19] <@[Chair]Andrew> The template engine is Freemarker, Stefan is the sole lead on the project
      and the only one I think that could do a write up at this point, unless James is willing.
      [20:20] <jamesd[Code_SB]> I could put a quick note up
      [20:20] <@[Chair]Andrew> Beyond that, I'd rather keep Stefan focused on the project itself, and not
      be too concerned with roadmapping it.
      [20:20] <[OGL]Nylanfs> I'm just curious as to the general outline, I'm not a coder so it will
      probably go over my head
      [20:20] <@[Chair]Andrew> @James, thanks for that James.
      [20:21] <[OGL]Nylanfs> if it's too involved :)
      [20:21] <@[Chair]Andrew> I think phase one is, [Correct me if I'm wrong James], to take the existing
      output from the current output engine and run it through freemarker.
      [20:21] <@[Chair]Andrew> Phase two is where freemarker takes over.
      [20:22] <@[Chair]Andrew> I'm sure I botched the explanation, but that's the layman version as far as
      my understanding goes. James?
      [20:22] <jamesd[Code_SB]> I'll make a short page and post the link :)
      [20:22] <@[Chair]Andrew> thanks, ;)
      [20:24] <@[Chair]Andrew> Alright, Readiness of 5.16.4 - we've hit on this. When the weekend comes up
      I'll be asking for everyone's status, if we all agree that the APG is ready for Alpha [meaning
      stable and satisfactory, I'm not shooting for perfect, nor even wholly complete, just ready for
      public use], then we'll let James know to release the RC, after that, only showstoppers will be
      allowed to halt the one week release cycle.
      [20:24] <[OGL]Nylanfs> Sounds acceptable to me
      [20:24] <@[Chair]Andrew> We'll continue to ship updates via the OOC releases as the feedback from
      the public comes in.
      [20:25] <jamesd[Code_SB]> Sounds like a good plan
      [20:25] <@[Chair]Andrew> That's it for the Agenda folks, open forum. Anything anyone wishes to bring
      up before we close the meeting? This includes observers. Anyone may speak up.
      [20:25] <[PR]Maredudd> Soumds good to me.
      [20:26] <[PR]Maredudd> I have a quick correction to my previous PR Report:
      [20:26] <@[Chair]Andrew> Go ahead Eric
      [20:27] <[PR]Maredudd> Checking my notes I realized the Shadmar set had already gone to the
      publisher and has come back. There was a monpr change requested that has been made and the set is
      now ready for release.
      [20:27] <[PR]Maredudd> I have advanced the tracker accordingly. Its all your Andrew!
      [20:27] <@[Chair]Andrew> Awesome. I'll get it in.
      [20:27] <@[Chair]Andrew> Paul N. Anything you'd like to discuss?
      [20:29] <@[Chair]Andrew> Thoth, aka Paul Melroy, if you have the time, I'd like to see how the new
      UI demo works for you. See if it's an improvement.
      [20:29] <Thoth___> I can certainly give it a shot.
      [20:30] <@[Chair]Andrew> Okay, any observers with comments or questions? Closing meeting in a few if
      no one else has anything
      [20:31] <Thoth___> (Not from me anyway).
      [20:32] <jamesd[Code_SB]> One from me
      [20:32] <@[Chair]Andrew> okay James
      [20:32] <jamesd[Code_SB]> The overview of the template engine project is now at
      http://wiki.pcgen.org/Template_Engine
      [20:33] <@[Chair]Andrew> Thanks for that James
      [20:33] <@[Chair]Andrew> Thanks for coming everyone, this meeting is adjourned *bangs gavel*

      --
      Andrew Maitland (LegacyKing)
      Admin Silverback - PCGen Board of Directors
      Data Chimp, Docs Tamarin
      Unique Title "Quick-Silverback Tracker Monkey"
      Unique Title "The Torturer of PCGen"


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.