Proposed plan of discussion.

Content and general development discussion, including maps, quests, and server code from the development team.
Post Reply
User avatar
criptos
Peon
Peon
Posts: 75
Joined: 20 Sep 2005, 17:00
Contact:

Proposed plan of discussion.

Post by criptos » 28 Sep 2005, 21:18

first, I would like to propose a plan of discussion.
The plan of discussion will addres WHEN specific topics about server development should be discussed.

The product from the plan of discussion would be a hierarchical requirements to be designed.

After the plan of discussion, we can discuss architecture. To stablish how things should work internally (some of this have been done at the wiki). After the architecture, coding conventions and interface standars are stablished, we can go for a roadmap of implemenation.

the roadpam, states what should be done when, the order and must states release versions, the roadmap sould be planned til 4rth version.

When arriving to the 3dr version, the architecture, conventions and interface, must be reviewed to adjust the roadmap, and then again, setup the roadmap til 6th version.

In this way the server development can be done fast, and more accurated.
May the Source be With You
User avatar
biggeruniverse
Peon
Peon
Posts: 42
Joined: 17 Sep 2005, 05:33

Post by biggeruniverse » 30 Sep 2005, 06:12

Ok. That'd be great if there were several committers that could focus on server development, but I don't think that will be the case.

The landscape to me is something more akin to two cities - each with separate leadership.

The client and the server are separate, with separate resources and areas of focus. Although elvenprogrammer is currently presiding over both, I think that development will reach a critical mass where someone else will need to take point on server development. elvenprogrammer would still have final say (thereby retaining project cohesion), but someone else would be handling day-to-day direction (or vice-versa).

The server development will be far more complex than the client, as everything will happen at the server end. The majority of work for TMW devteam is still to come.

So, in short:
1. elven is going to have to call these shots
2. there should to be two camps the work closely, but on separate parts
3. what's wrong with Java :P (I needed a third point, and I can't think just now)
We are on the outer reaches of someone else's universe
User avatar
ElvenProgrammer
TMW Adviser
TMW Adviser
Posts: 2526
Joined: 13 Apr 2004, 20:11
Location: Italy
Contact:

Post by ElvenProgrammer » 30 Sep 2005, 07:34

I agree, I agree, I agree. The problem is that we don't have so many programmers. I was thinking that only one will go on with client development (probably me), while the others will work on the server with Bjorn being the head of them. I prefer myself to avoid the server development because I don't want to waste its code which is still clean. As far as new programmers come, I'll assign them where they're required.
User avatar
maci
Warrior
Warrior
Posts: 507
Joined: 05 Dec 2004, 21:01
Location: Germany
Contact:

Post by maci » 01 Oct 2005, 07:31

3. what's wrong with Java (I needed a third point, and I can't think just now)
i tell you whats wrong with java

1. its slow

2. there is no way to make 100% use of it with fully free software
ElvenProgrammer wrote:Maci: don't be rude, we're here to help people ;)
User avatar
criptos
Peon
Peon
Posts: 75
Joined: 20 Sep 2005, 17:00
Contact:

Software factory and QA

Post by criptos » 04 Oct 2005, 04:13

Okay, here is the deal.

At my job, I have the liberty to pickup a proyect to teach how to work on real development to students. Also, any code generated by them, goes for a QA phase about documentation and testing.

This way, I could get like 3 or 4, even more developers.

What I need, is the requierement list. That?s why I wanted to discuss first the roadmap of development. I recently saw the development roadmap at the wiki, and I?m planning to use it as a start point.

I could post the major units of the server, and Bjorn say yes/no to the proposal.

I?m still working on the disccusion roadmap, since I was quite busy :) But I exepect to have it this week...
May the Source be With You
Guest

Post by Guest » 09 Oct 2005, 22:05

maci wrote:
3. what's wrong with Java (I needed a third point, and I can't think just now)
i tell you whats wrong with java

1. its slow

2. there is no way to make 100% use of it with fully free software
1. Common mistake

2. GCJ & Classpath if you're really that picky...
User avatar
Crush
TMW Adviser
TMW Adviser
Posts: 8046
Joined: 25 Aug 2005, 17:08
Location: Germany

Post by Crush » 09 Oct 2005, 22:18

there is no way to make use of the specific strengths and weakneses of your target system through the abstraction layer of the JRE as it is possible with a lower level language like C++.

But anyway, the server development has already been started in C++. it would be useless to start from scratch with another programming language now.
User avatar
Bjørn
TMW Adviser
TMW Adviser
Posts: 1430
Joined: 09 Dec 2004, 19:50
Location: North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
Contact:

Post by Bjørn » 09 Oct 2005, 23:21

Crush wrote:But anyway, the server development has already been started in C++. it would be useless to start from scratch with another programming language now.
I don't entirely agree and I hope we can kind of make the protocol a standard for which a compatible server could be developed in parallel. I do however think we should focus on making our C++ server usable first.
User avatar
Bertram
Knight
Knight
Posts: 1026
Joined: 07 Sep 2004, 15:55
Location: France

A roadmap ? Good idea !

Post by Bertram » 09 Oct 2005, 23:26

I really don't want this topic becoming a "Java vs. C++" discussion. I'd prefer having it discussed about the server roadmap. The thing we're missing now for server-assigned devs, is where to begin with.

For now, I think we need basics. Then, I'd say we have concentrate on:
- Login, Register, and basic chat function, which are almost working right between the new client core and the server.
- Also, we should see how to implement things such as client/server disconnections (The actual client doesn't know when the server stops.)
- And maybe for a third, we should make the server SPEAK a little more. The server should say its version, whether he's using a existing database or creating one, the kind of database he's using, and the file used for the db (as for sqlite), etc...
- And as a fourth, basic admin commands are very welcomed, maybe first to repeat these information, and maybe tell more about connected clients, and so on. Also we should see on how we could kick clients or change their stats levels, display them, etc...

Thanks for reading,
User avatar
biggeruniverse
Peon
Peon
Posts: 42
Joined: 17 Sep 2005, 05:33

Post by biggeruniverse » 10 Oct 2005, 11:51

Hi. Yeah, the guest was me. I really should pay attention when posting...

I like Bjørn's idea of creating (and documenting) the full protocol of the server, so that it could be reimplemented by anyone that's crazy enough to do it.
We are on the outer reaches of someone else's universe
User avatar
Bjørn
TMW Adviser
TMW Adviser
Posts: 1430
Joined: 09 Dec 2004, 19:50
Location: North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
Contact:

Post by Bjørn » 11 Oct 2005, 10:45

biggeruniverse wrote:Hi. Yeah, the guest was me. I really should pay attention when posting...
Shouldn't happen again. This was the only subforum that allowed anonymous posting, but not anymore. :-)
Reaktor
Peon
Peon
Posts: 12
Joined: 09 Oct 2005, 08:05

Post by Reaktor » 11 Oct 2005, 12:02

btw, have you implemented user-levels for player-accounts (such as moderators, gm's and developers)? I was just thinking that you could simply add user-level -flag for the next release and disable /commands from anyone without correct user-level.
Post Reply