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

BoD log - 5/17/06

Expand Messages
  • Paul W. King
    Session Start: Wed May 17 21:03:35 2006 Session Ident: #pcgen [21:03] * Now talking in #pcgen [21:03] sorry i m late [21:03]
    Message 1 of 1 , May 18, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Session Start: Wed May 17 21:03:35 2006
      Session Ident: #pcgen
      [21:03] * Now talking in #pcgen
      [21:03] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> sorry i'm late
      [21:03] <[Data_2nd]mosat> hi Paul
      [21:04] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> have we started yet?
      [21:04] <[Data_2nd]mosat> nope
      [21:04] <[Content_SB]Frank> ook
      [21:04] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> then we will
      [21:04] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> Code - James
      [21:05] <[Code_2nd]jdempsey> OK, I wasn;t really prepped to give a report,
      but I'll give a quick overview
      [21:05] <[Content_SB]Frank> Do the reports in that way make sense today?
      [21:06] <[Code_2nd]jdempsey> We currently have 56 bugs outstanding (which is
      pretty low historically) but we are not making headway towards the 5.10.1
      goal
      [21:06] <[Content_SB]Frank> We have 5.10.1 qand 5.12 as Agenda points, they
      would be part of that respectively
      [21:07] <[Code_2nd]jdempsey> So basically progress has been slow on the code
      front, possibly because we had the big push for 5.10
      [21:09] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> what, in your opinion, does PCGen have left to do
      to make 5.10.1?
      [21:09] <[Code_2nd]jdempsey> There is a list up on the wiki - that'd be
      qwhat I would refer to
      [21:10] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> fair enough...any idea on how long that would take
      [21:10] <[Code_2nd]jdempsey> There is one P9 IIRC and that is on my list
      [21:10] <[Code_2nd]jdempsey> no estimate sorry
      [21:10] * Nylanfs has joined #pcgen
      [21:10] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> fair enough
      [21:10] * AlphaSEQ has quit IRC (Read error: Operation timed out)
      [21:10] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> Content - Frank
      [21:11] <Nylanfs> Nick [OGL]PaulG
      [21:11] * Nylanfs is now known as [OGL]PaulG
      [21:11] <[OGL]PaulG> Ook all
      [21:11] <[Content_SB]Frank> Well, we don't have much left for 5.10.1 on
      Content side, 1 Data, 1 OS and 1 Docs Bug
      [21:11] <[Data_2nd]mosat> Ook!
      [21:12] <[Data_2nd]mosat> we're squashing 'em as they come in :-)
      [21:12] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> do any depend upon code?
      [21:12] <[Content_SB]Frank> The Data Bug is waiting for Tir, he said that he
      would have it on his hard disk, but needed to go over it
      [21:12] <[Data_2nd]mosat> not the one's on that list
      [21:13] <[Content_SB]Frank> The OS Bug is really a Code Bug, IMO
      [21:13] * [CM-SB]soulcatcher has joined #pcgen
      [21:13] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> hey all, sorry I'm late
      [21:13] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> that's ok Devon...i was a bit late as well
      [21:14] <[Content_SB]Frank> Obviously under certain circumstances PCGen
      exportss the name and not the OUTPUTNAME to the sheet
      [21:14] <[Code_2nd]jdempsey> Hi Devon - I've just done a quick code summary
      [21:14] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> ok, cool
      [21:15] <[Content_SB]Frank> Content would be ready as soon as Tir commits
      his changes.
      [21:15] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> k
      [21:15] <[Content_SB]Frank> That's all for 5.10.1
      [21:15] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> Tracker - Papa...looks like you're it right now :)
      [21:17] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> or Papa could not be here
      [21:17] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> anyway, onto the agenda
      [21:17] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> heh
      [21:17] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> 1) 5.10.1
      [21:17] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> where do we stand?
      [21:18] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> Frank's already stated Content
      [21:18] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> Devon, can you go into a bit of detail for Code?
      [21:18] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> not really, I'v ebeen MIA because of my move
      [21:18] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> I'm jsut starting to get caught up on email for
      the project
      [21:19] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> I'm trying to get through code's perspective on
      Mynex's list before I really get to 5.10.1 since that appears to be blocking
      on me
      [21:20] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> alright, speaking of Mynex's list, what is your
      opinion so far?
      [21:20] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> i'm assuming that you haven't ploughed through the
      whole thing
      [21:20] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> well, I know some of it from earlier
      [21:20] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> many things aren't bad
      [21:21] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> and the jars can even be backported to 5.10.1
      [21:21] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> for delivery with data sets
      [21:22] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> some are not gonna happen for a while
      [21:22] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> much of it depends on if data is fine with his
      syntax too
      [21:22] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> which ones, so far, do you think would be the
      easiest to implement?
      [21:22] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> and which ones are going to take a while?
      [21:23] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> well, the bonuses are all probably easy
      [21:23] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> but also probably won't be backportable
      [21:23] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> prepantheon, deity, prediety are all not bad
      [21:24] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> prespell probably isn't horrible
      [21:24] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> the new spell: syntax may be problematic, that
      one is potentially a biggy
      [21:25] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> natural attacks is huge
      [21:25] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> all things being equal, the list is about 1/3
      doable and backportable
      [21:25] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> 1/3rd doable and not backportable
      [21:25] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> and 1/3rd big, and may not make 5.12
      [21:25] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> that's cool
      [21:26] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> what about substitution levels? i'd like that,
      personally, but i have no idea the coding involved to do it
      [21:26] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> from a code perspective, I'll assume these are
      done wihtout changes when I state my best guess as to difficulty
      [21:26] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> but it's up to data to tell me if the tags are
      something they want
      [21:27] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> I don't know
      [21:27] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> Frank/Eddy...what do you think of the tag
      proposals?
      [21:27] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> I think Zaister was working on that
      [21:27] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> someone already researched substitution levels
      [21:28] <[Content_SB]Frank> There are some on Mynex list that are in that or
      a similar form on our list as well, and there are some that collide with our
      ideas.
      [21:28] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> ok, I need y'all to give feedback on those ones
      [21:28] <[Content_SB]Frank> e.g. the current thought about Natural attacks
      is to make them equipment objects
      [21:29] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> yeah
      [21:29] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> which mynex has publically stated he thinks is
      stupid
      [21:29] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> you are the data sb
      [21:29] <[Data_2nd]mosat> I'm with him, don't like that
      [21:29] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> and ultimatly I'll do what your choice is
      [21:29] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> what, making them equipment objects?
      [21:29] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> why is i t bad?
      [21:29] <[OGL]PaulG> What's the alternatives?
      [21:30] <[Data_2nd]mosat> however aaron proposed an idea which is a hybrid
      of both treatment
      [21:30] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> ultimately I personally want to simplify
      everything we can, to have a minimal amount of conceptual objects
      [21:30] <[Content_SB]Frank> Let's sort those Freqs out that can be in the
      5.12 scope, and have them discussed on Experimental.
      [21:30] <[Content_SB]Frank> Quick shots here won't serve as well, I think.
      [21:30] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> if I had my way, skills, templates, feats,
      languages, etc would all be the same boject type behind the scenes
      [21:31] <[Data_2nd]mosat> sounds good to me
      [21:31] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> I think much of the architectural brokenness of
      pcgen comes from the fact that we have so many objects that sort of do the
      same thing
      [21:31] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> OO approach? :D
      [21:31] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> yeah
      [21:32] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> well... I am a programmer
      [21:32] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> true...and i took enough in college/grad school to
      understand the basic core
      [21:33] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> alright, so Mynex's list is going to get moved to
      Experimental?
      [21:33] <[Content_SB]Frank> So, Devon, can you go over them and sort them
      into categories like 5.12, CMP Jars, or not in some time?
      [21:34] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> I'm writing an email that has my comments about
      each one.
      [21:34] <[Content_SB]Frank> We then concentrate the discussion on those that
      are doable in 5.12
      [21:34] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> so you know Frank, I have a deep desire to do a
      big change to lst
      [21:34] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> but it's one that has been hashed out with a
      number of people in data, and it keeps most of your knowledge in tact
      [21:34] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> but adds some new features
      [21:34] <[Content_SB]Frank> I heard wild stories about that. ;)
      [21:34] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> such as the ability to have more then one
      object type per file
      [21:35] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> and the ability to declare somethign as the
      child of something else
      [21:35] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> (thus eliminating the horrid syntax of class
      files)
      [21:35] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> also it will finally put an end to tab
      delimiting
      [21:35] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> but on the plus side, each tag essentially
      functions the same
      [21:35] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> or the sme with extensions
      [21:36] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> so I'm jsut gonna tell Mynex *no* on his Race
      and Template restructuring idea
      [21:36] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> no more tab delimiting? PL will need either tossed
      or undergo a major overhaul then
      [21:36] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> because the new syntax will handle that far
      more gracefully
      [21:36] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> this will probably be the end of prettylst
      [21:36] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> but eric stated that it was already essentially
      at the end of it's useful life anyway
      [21:37] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> thing is, i'd still like to have some sort of
      syntax verification program, which is what i mainly use PL for
      [21:37] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> yeah, we will have something that can do that
      [21:37] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> it does a great job at cathing spelling
      errors...among other things
      [21:37] <[Content_SB]Frank> We will then need a replacement script for
      prettylst and perhaps a converter for data
      [21:37] <[Data_2nd]mosat> I wonder if the crosschecking functions can be
      salvaged? that is more valuable that the reformating
      [21:37] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> but pl is not gonna make this leap
      [21:38] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> actually, as I make this new syntax
      [21:38] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> exactly Eddy...that was another great piece of PL
      [21:38] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> I figure I'll need to write something taht can
      parse the old sytax into the new one
      [21:38] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> and that will encompass the syntax checker
      [21:38] <[Data_2nd]mosat> could it be built into the program?
      [21:38] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> I would rather not
      [21:38] <[Data_2nd]mosat> say part of the debuger?
      [21:39] <[Content_SB]Frank> Remember we are aiming at a 6 months cycle, can
      all these changes be done in time or are we talking 6.0 here?
      [21:39] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> I don't want this to permanently tie pcgen to
      the old lst syntax
      [21:39] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> this is the goal for 6.0
      [21:39] <[Data_2nd]mosat> OK
      [21:39] <[Content_SB]Frank> k
      [21:39] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> this change is major rev number worth
      [21:39] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> the goal of 5.12 is to ientify all syntax that
      can't make the leap to the new syntax
      [21:40] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> and deprecate it by the end of 5.12
      [21:40] <[Data_2nd]mosat> JEP compliance in that scope?
      [21:40] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> so that it can be removed immediatly after
      5.12, clearing the way for implementation of the new syntax
      [21:40] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> yeah, it has to be
      [21:41] <[Content_SB]Frank> will that include JEP for OS?
      [21:41] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> if you read some of the proposals in dev, the
      OS infrastructure may be tossed before 6.0 to create a simpler beast
      [21:41] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> using xslt and/or velocity
      [21:42] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> the token scheme for output sheets is creaking
      with age, and we now have standardized options we can make use of
      [21:42] <[Content_SB]Frank> We currently have 2 OS monkeys, I'm not sure if
      we can cope with rewriting any sheet in that short time.
      [21:43] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> well, this should actually make writing sheets
      *substntially* easier
      [21:43] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> that would be cool
      [21:43] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> especially since we only need to convert
      base.xml to velocity instead of output tokens to get like 60% of them
      [21:43] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> i've dabbled into doing OSs, and its not fun
      [21:44] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> that, and most of the tokens that exist with
      output tokens will have *direct* analogs in the elocity sheet
      [21:44] <[Data_2nd]mosat> that would be nice, I'm writing sheets for
      Spycraft 2 and it's a PITA
      [21:44] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> so it will literally will be search and replace
      for some
      [21:44] <[OGL]PaulG> We could perhaps snagg some OS people from CMP's users
      :)
      [21:44] <[Content_SB]Frank> Hm, not familiar with velocity, can you send me
      a link for a web page that has info on it?
      [21:44] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> if one look sat it, we have essentially
      re-invented the jsp/php/asp wheel
      [21:45] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> there are lots of really well tested programs
      out there that know how to create web pages
      [21:45] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity/
      [21:45] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> velocity is part of the apache jakarta project
      [21:45] <[Content_SB]Frank> k
      [21:46] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> one nice thing? free documentation - all we
      need to document are what objects we expose
      [21:47] <[Content_SB]Frank> I'll have to look into it to give an assessment.
      It may still be a lot of work with a limited number of OS monkeys.
      [21:48] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> alright, this has been good 5.10.1/5.12
      discussion, but let's move the rest to Experimental/Dev
      [21:48] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> yeah, well I want the new infrastructure in
      place by 5.12
      [21:48] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> which means we can keep both for a full release
      [21:48] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> next topic, ads in Dungeon
      [21:49] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> still waiting to hear back if they take PayPal
      payments
      [21:49] <[Data_2nd]mosat> dead line is end of month for that and Silven's
      book
      [21:49] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> are we set on only an ad in Dungeon, and not both
      Dungeon and Dragon
      [21:49] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> right
      [21:50] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> how's the ad creation going Eddy?
      [21:50] <[Data_2nd]mosat> I'll have it before then cause I'm on vacation at
      the end of the month
      [21:50] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> gotcha
      [21:50] <[Data_2nd]mosat> well it's in my head right now ;-)
      [21:50] <[Data_2nd]mosat> Once I get a block of time it'll come out fast
      [21:51] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> so, we have a full page ad from Silven as part of
      the sponsorship, and we're buying a 1/6 page ad from Paizo
      [21:51] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> but again, Dungeon only?
      [21:51] <[Data_2nd]mosat> I think we only have the cash for one
      [21:52] <[Data_2nd]mosat> so let's start with Dungeon
      [21:52] <[OGL]PaulG> We just have enough cash to do both, and I'll donate
      some more if we decide to do both
      [21:52] <[OGL]PaulG> I thought
      [21:53] <[OGL]PaulG> OT, anyone know how to seach WotC's forums?
      [21:53] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> nope
      [21:53] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> and yeah, I would be happy to donate to help
      get us in both mags
      [21:53] <[OGL]PaulG> NM, found it
      [21:54] <[Data_2nd]mosat> should I post the ads for review in the main group
      for feed back?
      [21:54] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> well, we have Paul G and Devon willing to donate
      to make up the shortage...thank you
      [21:54] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> yes please Eddy
      [21:54] <[Content_SB]Frank> Search WotC forums? Try GOOGLE. You can put
      site:Wizards.com or something like that in your search and it will only
      search that server
      [21:54] <[Data_2nd]mosat> will do
      [21:55] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> i'll get with Paizo to confirm payment method and
      cost
      [21:56] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> next on the agenda: Team Structure
      [21:57] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> i know Kar wants to start culling the unresponsive
      members
      [21:57] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> any discussion on this?
      [21:58] <[Code_2nd]jdempsey> For code this should be related to checkins
      rather than having an entry in the Wiki IMO
      [21:59] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> yeah
      [21:59] <[Code_2nd]jdempsey> But yes periodic removal of people who have
      left is an essential part of the project
      [21:59] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> we spend our time trying to get patches in, and
      in general are a squirely bunch not prone to actually tolerating overhead ;)
      [22:00] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> but shouldn't folks doing check-ins have a Wiki
      entry?
      [22:01] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> they probably do
      [22:01] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> apparently I do
      [22:01] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> not that I had anything to do with it
      [22:01] <[Content_SB]Frank> I think the Content related ones left on the
      list now are really those that have been inactive.
      [22:02] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> so long as a user has made a checkin in the
      last quarter, I don't want them removed
      [22:03] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> that's code
      [22:04] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> Frank...do you have a preference about how Content
      should be handled?
      [22:04] <[Content_SB]Frank> We couldn't go with that, as most Data
      development takes place outside of SVN
      [22:05] <[Content_SB]Frank> We best let the Liaison TMs keep the contact, I
      think.
      [22:05] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> alright
      [22:05] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> last agenda item: further sponsorship
      [22:07] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> my thoughts:
      [22:07] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> 1) how do define a sponsor
      [22:07] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> 2) do we actively go out and seek sponsors
      [22:07] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> 3) do we show sponsors datasets/code preference
      [22:07] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> 1) a sponsor is someone who has a fixed level
      of ongoing donation over a certain bar
      [22:07] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> 2) yes
      [22:07] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> 3) probably some
      [22:07] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> (imho)
      [22:07] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> if we set a bar, we'll need to define that bar
      [22:07] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> yeah
      [22:07] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> the only reason we need a bar is to be fair to
      the other sponsors
      [22:08] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> if we take one like silven, who gives us
      25/month and advertizing
      [22:08] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> it's not cool to give the same level of praise
      to someone who gives us a buck a month
      [22:09] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> i agree
      [22:09] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> we need a baseline of what the in-kind value of
      the monthly advert from silven is
      [22:09] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> then, if we start getting widlyly different
      support levels
      [22:09] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> we can do what the musuem or zoo foes
      [22:09] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> platinum, gold, silver, cooper, etc
      [22:09] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> copper, blah
      [22:09] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> tho likely with cooler, more gamery names
      [22:10] * [BD]merton_monk has joined #pcgen
      [22:11] <[BD]merton_monk> ook! sorry I keep missing you all - I seem to
      check on every wedneday you're *not* meeting
      [22:12] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> and we just agreed that Bryan should give us all a
      pay raise
      [22:12] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> oh, hi Bryan...didn't see you. :)
      [22:12] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> yeah, thanks brian :0
      [22:12] <[BD]merton_monk> doh!
      [22:12] <[BD]merton_monk> Well, I'll bring some stuff with me to GenCon, so
      you can all get something then, deal? :)
      [22:13] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> oh well, i can't make it
      [22:13] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> anyway, any other thoughts on sponsors?
      [22:14] <[PL]Briarius> Um...may I say something?
      [22:14] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> shoot
      [22:14] <[PL]Briarius> Perhaps...this may be a good project for a Publisher
      Liason...
      [22:15] <[PL]Briarius> ?
      [22:15] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> *chuckle* yeah, probably...i just haven't heard
      from Beaver in so long that i keep forgetting to get with you
      [22:15] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> indeed ;)
      [22:15] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> Beaver has notes, but he's swamped with RL that i
      don't know when i'll hear from him again
      [22:15] <[PL]Briarius> I see...
      [22:16] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> get with me off-list ( paulking dot rhochi at
      verizon dot net
      [22:16] <[PL]Briarius> ...so back to updating the wiki it is...
      [22:16] <[BD]merton_monk> Having a Publisher Liason at gencon is pretty much
      a necessity
      [22:16] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> i agree, but RL is constraining me
      [22:16] <[BD]merton_monk> That's the best time to go around to all the
      publishers and, well, liase :)
      [22:16] <[PL]Briarius> Well...oddly enough I WILL be at GenCon
      [22:16] <[BD]merton_monk> I undertand that completely, kingpaul! :D
      [22:17] <[BD]merton_monk> excellent!
      [22:17] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> excellent!
      [22:17] <[PL]Briarius> (I have just been appointed Conventions Director for
      Living Kingdoms of Kalamar)
      [22:17] <[OGL]PaulG> Yea :)
      [22:17] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> course, GenCon is the one time we actually
      consistantly *have* beaver
      [22:17] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> oooohhhhh
      [22:17] <[OGL]PaulG> Cool
      [22:17] <[PL]Briarius> So...maybe I can liase with Kenzer and the RPGA
      [22:17] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> which is good...Beaver can unload his knowledge
      onto Briarius
      [22:18] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> well, i know we, PCGen, can't do Kalamar datasets
      because of Kenzer's licensing with WotC
      [22:18] <[OGL]PaulG> Wasn't Kenzer & Co at the Monkey party two years ago?
      [22:18] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> yep...i remember Dwarf...but that's it
      [22:19] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> yeah
      [22:19] <[BD]merton_monk> The Kenzer guys are cool
      [22:19] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> they can't do anything with us
      [22:19] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> it's all gotta be via CMP
      [22:19] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> they are not OGL
      [22:19] <[PL]Briarius> ok\
      [22:19] <[BD]merton_monk> unless they ever revamp their license with Wotc,
      but that seems unlikely
      [22:20] <[BD]merton_monk> It's Wotc's call, and they don't seem inclined to
      change their mind
      [22:20] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> or if WotC ever allows non-ogl free datasets
      [22:20] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> which seems even less likely
      [22:21] * [PL]Briarius bites his tongue in regard to WotC
      [22:21] <[BD]merton_monk> heh - hey, can't be too hard on them, they did
      open this up to some degree via OGL
      [22:22] <[BD]merton_monk> we'd need to prove to them that free data sets
      wouldn't compromise their IP or their ability to sell product.
      [22:22] <[BD]merton_monk> It's been a slow process to get that through to
      some smaller publishers, Wotc has a lot more reason to be cautious
      [22:23] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> well, we're pushing 1.5 hours
      [22:23] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> so, anything else for the good of the order?
      [22:23] <[BD]merton_monk> I'm so sorry for missing meetings lately, is there
      anything that I need to be aware of immediately?
      [22:24] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> not really
      [22:24] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> jsut know taht we are about to likley embark on
      a revision of lst itself
      [22:24] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> and the end is neigh by 6.0 fo tabs
      [22:24] <[BD]merton_monk> oh, nothing big then.... ;)
      [22:24] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> for tabs
      [22:25] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> I'll have a spec out eventually for it
      [22:25] <[BD]merton_monk> I'll be intrigued to see what you have in mind
      [22:25] <[BD]merton_monk> Before tabs I did everything via buttons, but
      everyone wanted tabs instead
      [22:25] <[OGL]PaulG> tabs deliniated in the data :)
      [22:26] <[OGL]PaulG> not the program
      [22:26] <[BD]merton_monk> ah
      [22:26] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> yeah
      [22:26] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> e are looking at a mostly 1:1 conversion of
      tags to the JSON format
      [22:26] <[BD]merton_monk> hm, I'm not familiar with that
      [22:26] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> the primary win is that things can have
      children
      [22:27] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> http://www.json.org/example.html
      [22:27] <[BD]merton_monk> I'll have to look into it, thanks for the link
      [22:27] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> yeah, np
      [22:28] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> what it means is that our highly irregular
      syntax will have a few concepts it's been missing
      [22:28] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> lists
      [22:28] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> and children
      [22:28] <[BD]merton_monk> looks like dictionaries we used in objective-c
      [22:28] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> {"menu": { "id": "file", "value": "File:",
      "popup": { "menuitem": [ {"value": "New", "onclick":
      "CreateNewDoc()"}, {"value": "Open", "onclick": "OpenDoc()"},
      {"value": "Close", "onclick": "CloseDoc()"} ] } }}
      [22:28] <[Data_2nd]mosat> I gotta run guys, it's been real :D
      [22:29] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> but I have samples of actual converted lst
      [22:29] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> and it's way more managable
      [22:29] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> later eddy
      [22:29] <[Data_2nd]mosat> night
      [22:29] <[Content_SB]Frank> night, Eddy
      [22:29] <[PL]Briarius> I have to run as well...I sent you an e-mail Mr. King
      [22:29] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> it also means we'll be able to have more then
      one object type per file
      [22:29] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> Mr. King? call me Paul...Mr. King was my
      grandfather (dad's Rev. King)
      [22:29] <[BD]merton_monk> nite eddy!
      [22:29] * [Data_2nd]mosat has left #pcgen
      [22:29] <[PL]Briarius> lol
      [22:30] * [PL]Briarius has left #pcgen
      [22:30] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> so instead of organizing the files via object
      type, you can organize they by game concepts, and this opens the door to
      potentially allowing fine grained dependancies from other datasets
      [22:30] <[BD]merton_monk> it would be nice to collapse things into 1 file,
      though it's also nice to have them separated in an obvious manner
      [22:30] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> right
      [22:30] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> I was thinking for example that you might have
      a rogue file
      [22:30] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> and that has all the rogue abilities
      [22:30] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> and the rogue calss
      [22:30] <[BD]merton_monk> yeah, you can separate along whatever criteria you
      want
      [22:31] <[BD]merton_monk> which would be nice
      [22:31] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> then, if somethign depends on rogue stuff, it
      can jsut reference *taht* file as a dependancy
      [22:31] <[OGL]PaulG> Well I have to get to bed, GF is givine me the EYE
      [22:31] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> it'll mean datasets that have a lot more files,
      but smaller files as well
      [22:31] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> night paul
      [22:31] * [OGL]PaulG has quit IRC (Quit: )
      [22:32] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> and make doing custom worlds that pick and
      choose from datasets a breeze
      [22:32] <[BD]merton_monk> don't want that EYE ;)
      [22:32] <[Code_2nd]jdempsey> I should move on too - bye
      [22:32] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> later james!
      [22:33] * [Code_2nd]jdempsey has left #pcgen
      [22:33] <[Content_SB]Frank> Sounds like we would get a loadful of different
      options to code the same data set.
      [22:33] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> I'm almost done on a first round comment draft
      on mynex's requests
      [22:33] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> yeah
      [22:33] <[Content_SB]Frank> We will then probably have to develop standards
      for that, to make maintenance easier.
      [22:33] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> potentially one could even consider putting
      every object into their own files
      [22:33] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> and then jsut have dependancy loading
      [22:34] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> but that may be too extreme
      [22:34] <[BD]merton_monk> I would think so ;)
      [22:34] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> well, consider that we *could* make all the
      objects visible
      [22:34] <[BD]merton_monk> yup
      [22:34] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> and only load the stuf you need for your
      character
      [22:34] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> then allow you to load specific stuff on an as
      needed basis
      [22:34] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> making the UI a *lot* cleaner
      [22:35] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> but that's *way* down the road
      [22:35] <[Content_SB]Frank> Yeah, you could pick only the stuff from a data
      set that you really want.
      [22:35] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> yeah, or give a person the option to pikc the
      object that ads everything from the dataset (or say all equipment)
      [22:36] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> well, i need to get going myself
      [22:36] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> talk to y'alllater
      [22:36] <[PR_SB]kingpaul> y'all later
      [22:37] <[Content_SB]Frank> night, Paul
      [22:37] <[CM-SB]soulcatcher> night
      [22:37] * Disconnected
      Session Close: Wed May 17 22:37:38 2006


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