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

Re: [pcgen] Re: move on, nothing to see here

Expand Messages
  • Steve Gilroy
    Ok, I don t need some newbie preaching open source to me. And before you get all defencive keep in mind I have been working on various open source projects
    Message 1 of 62 , Jan 31, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Ok, I don't need some "newbie" preaching open source to me. And before
      you get all defencive keep in mind I have been working on various open
      source projects for over 7 years now, so you most likely are a "newbie"
      compared to me and several other contributors.

      I do donate my time to PCGen as a beta tester, bug reporter, OS Lemur,
      and occationally I do some LST work (mostly personal work on IP sources
      so I don't have to pay CMP). However LST "programming" is not something
      I'm that great at and I know next to nothing about Java programming.

      I have offered my services to PCGen many times. If there are minor data
      bugs that I can handle I'd be more than happy to help...I've said that
      before. If I need to start a recruitment drive for people to work on
      and maintain just the 3.0 SRD then I'll do that to. However that is not
      something I think should be done. People should be able contribute
      their time and effort on what interests them or what they are requested
      to do and agree to do. To force a group to work on JUST the 3.0 SRD is
      unfair and a ridiculous expectation. However I do feel that the 3.0 SRD
      LST files should be in better shape than they are before the major focus
      is switched to the 3.5 RSRD (however it appears that it is to late for
      that since there has been a drive by the BoD to get 3.5 done, regardless
      of the state of 3.0)

      And just for your clarification, most of the work that needs to be done
      on 3.0 is LST work, that means LST Monkeys. Data Monkeys typically do
      Java programming work.

      Chip Dunning wrote:

      >Then why don't you *volunteer* *your time* to the data monkeys with the
      >express idea of keeping up the 3.0 tree. The thing about open source is
      >that since it is all "give" work people tend to work on the things that
      >interest them. So, if nobody is working to maintain the 3.0 branch then
      >obviously nobody who gives of the time feels they want to do the work.
      >
      >What you really want is for someone to give of their time to a project
      >so that it can support what *you* want. I am sure the Data Monkeys would
      >love to have your time given in support of the 3.0 base. Unless of
      >course you are just interested in complaining instead of getting involved.
      >
      >Do you have something to prove that 50% comment - or is it just another
      >strawman for you to kick around?
      >
      >
      >Chip
      >
      >

      --
      Steven Gilroy
      PCGen OS Lemur
      Open Source Contributor for over 6 years

      "In a world without fences, who needs GATES?"
    • Barak
      It basically depends on how they were written by the publisher. I would imagine any new sources publishers produce will be geared towards 3.5 and that s how
      Message 62 of 62 , Feb 2, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        It basically depends on how they were written by the publisher.

        I would imagine any new sources publishers produce will be geared towards
        3.5 and that's how they'll be coded for PCGen.

        Older stuff was obviously created for 3.0 rules and so will be coded that
        way.

        I would presume if OGL publishers put out conversion documents, we'd have a
        set for each ruleset. :p

        Barak
        ~PCGen BoD
        ~OS Silverback


        > -----Original Message-----
        > From: Jay - Firesbane [mailto:firesbane2@...]
        >
        > Barak,
        > Thank you for chiming in.
        > I have a related question regarding outside sources. Are the
        > bulk of them
        > written to work with 3.0 or 3.5, or does it not matter.
        >
        > --Jay
        >
        > > Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2004 20:25:53 -0500
        > > From: "Barak" <barak@...>
        > >Subject: RE: Re: move on, nothing to see here
        >
        >
        > <snip>
        > >The upshot is that *both* are going to be supported to the
        > best of our
        > >ability. We will *not* forsake one for the other.
        > >
        > >Barak
        > >~ PCGen BoD
        > >~ OS Silverback
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.