Re: [pcgen_developers] REMOVE:ABILITY
I'm seeing both sides of the aisle here.
On one hand, we need to eventually cut 5.16 as finalized (We've done this a couple of times now and then changed our mind). Each time we go back to dual branches the code progress seems to crawl to a slow as bugs have to be fixed in both, as does determining features not to mention the tracking of each side. Our 6.0 release isn't a year off, it's planned for March of 2011 (7 months away), but that date keeps pushing back as we continue to divide our attention between the two separate dev cycles (Trunk hasn't had an incremental release in ages, going on two or three months IIRC - ah, the exact date of 5.17.3 is 2010-05-31, Alphas are supposed to be every two weeks, 6/14, 6/28, 7/12, 7/26 - We should be at 5.17.7 currently, almost ready to release 5.17.8).
We can support *most* of APG without the code support in 5.16; though it'll be released as an OOC Set. We can get it out into the users hands within two or three months at current progress, give or take depending on how much time is needed to figure out the complex reactions and interactions. I've already made the PF Core more receptive to the APG in the last 5.16.3 increment (RC3).
It may be better to focus on the trunk at this point; it would crate an incentive for our user base to pound on the trunk to make sure it's working as expected, especially when the code support is added, plus we'll have a nice new UI in the same time frame merged in the trunk; along with a nice new Template Engine for a clean OS, perhaps with Logo support (Make those Sheets really nice).
So, no, I don't think a year is the plan, we *can* give a basic set that handles *most* of the APG mechanics, and those that desire cutting edge and perfection can help us with the trunk and get the newer stuff.
My plans for the APG - get the easier stuff in the set; then hammer out how to work the Favored Class/ Race stuff into it without becoming an eye sore. (Separate issue, and discussion thread). I'm doing Spells, Eric is handling Equipment. Once the easy stuff is in, then we figure out what hard stuff can be implemented vs. what requires Code Work. Once that assessment is finished, we can work on getting that code into the trunk, and determine whether a 5.16 release is a viable solution or if we press on going forward with a 6.0 release instead.
Perhaps in three-five months, we'll be switching into Beta, I'm not sure though since it's up to Tom where we are in the Core Overhaul. What I *really* enjoy about this team, our ALPHA releases are a LOT more stable and superior to most other programs. Most bugs are squashed within a week of discovery in the trunk. I don't think it's unreasonable to ask our users to try out the Alphas. It's a nice symbiotic relationship - They help us improve, which in turn helps them.
Now, as James said earlier, if the desire is there to backport something and make another 5.16, then so be it. But each 5.16 stable release seems to take two months, so really, are we saving any time here?
On 8/11/2010 5:12 AM, Stefan Radermacher wrote:
Sure, you will probably find that most of the work is done here for you - the REMOVE:FEAT will already have to deal with an ability category (feat) so the implementation code will be there. What is left is the parsing. For that I would recommend looking at the ADD:ABILITY code. Your syntax would end up more like REMOVE:ABILITY|Special Ability|Trapfinding I would think, but best to run it past the data team first.
OK, I'll check that out.
Hmm, that might be problematic. The change is too late to be included in the current run. So please don't commit it to the 5.16 branch now. If we have a future 5.16.4 release it could be included there I guess, but none is planned currently. Now that I think about it though, it might be possible to package it up as part of an out of cycle release. Another alternative is not putting this dataset feature out to 5.16. However for starters this tag would best be developed in trunk and then we can look at back porting possibilities.
Out of cycle code? Is that possible? I think it would be a bad idea to make people wait until 6.0 is released for the to be able to use the APG. The book is out now, and Pathfinder RPG players will be eager to use it. Now that Herolabs is officially endorsed by Paizo and also working on APG data, we might be losing users if we say people will have to wait a year until we can support the most important stuff in the APG. I'm certain there are more little things in there that will require code work (several favored class bonuses come to mind), and maybe it's not a bad idea to start considering another 5.16 release to support that book as best we can. Stefan. ------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pcgen_developers/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pcgen_developers/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: firstname.lastname@example.org <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/--
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"