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

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

Expand Messages
  • Barak
    ... Because he s already one of my OS monkeys and I want him to stay there and not defect to the data team, thank you very much. ... Well, since the original
    Message 1 of 62 , Jan 31, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: Chip Dunning [mailto:chip.dunning@...]
      >
      > Then why don't you *volunteer* *your time* to the data
      > monkeys with the

      Because he's already one of my OS monkeys and I want him to stay there and
      not defect to the data team, thank you very much.

      > 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.

      Well, since the original complaint was people working on 3.0 instead of 3.5,
      I think you're barking up the wrong tree here.

      > 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

      No, that's what another user suggested. He wants 3.5 and not 3.0 so feels
      that there should be no efforts towards 3.0 work at all.

      > 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.

      Obviously you have no idea what you're talking about in this regard as Gil
      does give his time to PCGen. And even if he didn't, we are not in the habit
      of ignoring reasonable user requests.

      > Do you have something to prove that 50% comment - or is it
      > just another strawman for you to kick around?

      And can you prove the opposite? It's a useless argument, neither side has
      statistical numbers so it's moot. You obviously feel one way and he feels
      another.

      My personal experience is that it's running about 50-50 among my gamer
      friends as far as which system they're going to use.

      Taking another tack, look at what started this little discussion... Someone
      thought there was too much effort going into 3.0.

      Following your argument above about what gets worked on and why, the people
      are working on 3.0 more than 3.5, so therefor that must be what they want to
      see in the program.

      Again following your logic above, if there *is* a majority that want 3.5,
      they're not willing to get involved to make it happen.

      *shrug*

      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
    • 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.