21:11 <@Hellfire667> Meeting starts. Rules as stated on the wiki apply. Etc.
21:12  * Hellfire667 is searching for the agenda
21:12 <@Hellfire667> 1. Opening
21:12 <@Hellfire667> 2. Discuss minutes of 2005-03-12
21:12 <@Hellfire667> 3. [RFD] Station & Industry directions (edited) (progress)
21:12 <@Hellfire667> 4. [RFD] Sharing of infrastructure (poll results)
21:12 <@Hellfire667> 5. [RFD] Cell based, freedom or something in between? (poll results)
21:12 <@Hellfire667> 6. DD
21:12 <@Hellfire667> 7. AOB
21:12 <@Hellfire667> 8. Close 
21:12 <@Hellfire667> Who will be our minutes man today? ~
21:12 -!- Prof_Frink is now known as Prof_Food
21:12 -!- Prof_Food [~Alan@ProfFrink.users.quakenet.org] has quit [Killed (*.quakenet.org (nick collision from same user@host))]
21:12 <+Steve^> ! Shall I?
21:12 <@Hellfire667> Ok. 
21:13 -!- Prof_Food [~Alan@ProfFrink.users.quakenet.org] has joined #transportempire
21:13 <@Hellfire667> 2. Discuss minutes of 2005-03-12
21:13 <@Hellfire667> Any comments on the minutes of last time? ~
21:13 <@Hellfire667> Interesting silence. I take that as a no. :)
21:13 <@Hellfire667>  3. [RFD] Station & Industry directions (edited) (progress) 
21:14 <@Hellfire667> Except for an extract of Zuu's minutes, nothing has been posted in this topic.
21:14 <@Hellfire667> Does anyone have anyhing to say about this topic? ~
21:14 <+jfs> moment, i'll check
21:14 <+jfs> (sorry for not being properly prepared)~
21:15 <@Hellfire667> :) ~
21:15 <+jfs> well, i have one thing to add:
21:15 <+jfs> stations and such obviously have a width, and they might make the track wider than it was originally
21:15 < Grunt_> ->
21:16 <+jfs> as such, they might not fit around *any* piece of track
21:16 <+jfs> if other buildings are very close to the track
21:16 <+jfs> also, the station might extend further on one side than on the other~
21:16 <@Hellfire667> Grunt. ~
21:16 < Grunt_> I think the idea is that stations will fit along any piece of track where there's sufficient room to build a platform. ~
21:17 <+jfs> ->
21:17 <@Hellfire667> jfs. ~
21:17 <+jfs> the minutes from last time says "Hellfire: I say, stations can fit around any piece of track in the game."
21:17 <@Hellfire667> ->
21:17 <+jfs> which i read as "no extra space would ever be required"~
21:17 < Grunt_> ->
21:17 <@Hellfire667> Hellfire.
21:18 <@Hellfire667> That was not what I meant exactly.
21:18 <@Hellfire667> The context in that discussion what curved pieces of track.
21:18 <@Hellfire667> I do agree that there must be enough room to place stations. ~
21:18 <@Hellfire667> Grunt. ~
21:18 < Grunt_> It seems inherently obvious that extra space is required to build stations around track, I think.
21:18 <+Steve^> ->
21:18 <@Hellfire667> ->
21:18 < Grunt_> It's also probable that stations should not be buildable around tracks that are curved more than very slightly. ~
21:19 <@Hellfire667> Can we then agree on "there must be enough space around the tracks"? ~
21:19 <@Hellfire667> Steve. ~
21:19 <+Steve^> I agree with Grunt_. ~
21:19 <+jfs> ->
21:19 <@Hellfire667> jfs. ~
21:20 <+jfs> on the thing about curved grunt just mentioned, i agree. usually curved railway track is also "tilted" somewhat, which would make entering/exiting the trains uncomfortable. or through-trains wouldn't be able to pass through the station without slowing much down~
21:20 <@Hellfire667> ->
21:20 <@Hellfire667> Does that matter for the game? ~
21:21 <+jfs> it's just a reason why it shouldn't be allowed~
21:22 <@Hellfire667> ->
21:22 <@Hellfire667> But why should we not allow it? I've seen a lot of curved stations in real life. Why not allow it for the game as well? ~
21:23 <+jfs> ->
21:23 < Grunt_> ->
21:23 <@Hellfire667> jfs. ~
21:23 <+jfs> there's imo no question whether curved stations should be allowed
21:23 <+jfs> they should be
21:24 <+jfs> but there should be a maximum curve allowed for stations, simply because a too curved station imo seems unrealistic
21:24 <+jfs> ~
21:24 <@Hellfire667> Grunt. ~
21:24 < Grunt_> Yeah, I'm just thinking that you shouldn't have a station around a curve with a radius of, say, two or three metres or something really, really small. ~
21:24 <@Hellfire667> Ok. I can live with that.
21:24 < Grunt_> ->
21:24 <@Hellfire667> Anything else? 
21:24 <@Hellfire667> Grunt. ~
21:24 < Grunt_> Do we want to put this to a vote at some point, then? ~
21:25 <@Hellfire667> What do you say, Steve? ~
21:25 <+Steve^> I think your stating the obvious, and would like to move on. ~
21:25 < Grunt_> ->
21:25 <@Hellfire667> Grunt. ~
21:26 < Grunt_> Someone not here might have an objection we haven't thought of yet, though, but we should probably move on for now. ~
21:26 <@Hellfire667> Ok.
21:26 <+jfs> ! yeah move on~
21:26 <@Hellfire667> 4. [RFD] Sharing of infrastructure (poll results) 
21:27 <@Hellfire667> The poll had 6 votes in favour of sharing infrastructure and 1 vote not in favour.
21:27 <+Steve^> ->
21:27 <@Hellfire667> By forum poll, sharing of infrastructure is accepted.
21:27 <@Hellfire667> Steve. ~
21:27 <+jfs> ->
21:27 <+Steve^> Everyone may want to share it, but the truth is, it's a nightmare to code and i can't see it ever being done properly. ~
21:27 <@Hellfire667> jfs. ~
21:27 < Grunt_> ->
21:27 <+jfs> i wouldn't mind if it was only allowed for games not involving any AI players~
21:28 <@Hellfire667> Grunt. ~
21:28 < Grunt_> We'll manage coding it somehow.  I've seen far, far worse hacks in code before. ;) ~
21:29 <@Hellfire667> Any responses? ~
21:29 <+Steve^> ->
21:29 <@Hellfire667> Steve. ~
21:29 <+Steve^> I agree with jfs, don't even try with the AI. ~
21:29 < Grunt_> ->
21:29 <@Hellfire667> Grunt. ~
21:29 < Grunt_> Well, we'll see how it works out with just human players.
21:29 <@Hellfire667> ->
21:29 < Grunt_> If we find some way to do it with the AI at a later date, we should give it a go, but stay away from there for now. ~
21:30 <@Hellfire667> I agree with Grunt here. ~
21:30 < Grunt_> ! Anything else to discuss here? ~
21:31 <@Hellfire667> Not, except what was already said.
21:31 <@Hellfire667> Move on? ~
21:31 < Grunt_> ! Move on. ~
21:31 <@Hellfire667> 5. [RFD] Cell based, freedom or something in between? (poll results) 
21:31 <@Hellfire667> 2 for triangular. 7 for rectangular.
21:31 <@Hellfire667> The poll says enough. :)
21:31 <@Hellfire667> ~
21:32 <@Hellfire667> Any comments? ~
21:32 <+Steve^> ->
21:32 <@Hellfire667> Steve.~
21:32 <+Steve^> Is that vote even for the topic? ~
21:33 <@Hellfire667> What do you mean with that? ~
21:33 <+Steve^> The topic is about tiles or freeform. I thought we had a seperate rectangle and triangle one? ~
21:33 <@Hellfire667> I'm talking about this topic: http://www.tt-forums.net/viewtopic.php?t=14202 ~
21:34 <+jfs> ->
21:34 <+Steve^> Ok... what about the rest of this topic then? ~
21:34 <@Hellfire667> jfs, what would you like to say? ~
21:35 <+jfs> i'm under the impression we already decided to use subdivided cells with some kind of snap points, and the remaining question just what what shape the cells should be~
21:36 <@Hellfire667> Ah yes... Now I see what Steve's comments are about!
21:36 <@Hellfire667> The poll indeed was to decide on the cell shape. We already made the decision for limited freeform last week. ~
21:37 <@Hellfire667> If there's nothing else to say about this, I'd like to move on to the next item on the agenda. ~
21:38 <@Hellfire667> 6. DD 
21:38 <+jfs> ->
21:38 <@Hellfire667> jfs. ~
21:38 <+jfs> i'd like to point to the first post I made on the forum about that: http://www.tt-forums.net/viewtopic.php?t=12992
21:38 <+Steve^> ->
21:38 <+jfs> ~
21:38 <@Hellfire667> Steve. ~
21:38 <+Steve^> I agree we need 2-3 people doing the DD, but then everyone else needs to check it over to make sure it's what we agreed on. ~
21:39 <@Hellfire667> ->
21:39 < Grunt_> ->
21:39 <@Hellfire667> Yes, that's probably the right way to do it. Will the other developers get to see intermediate results for comments, or just the whole thing when it's done? ~
21:39 <@Hellfire667> Grunt. ~
21:39 < Grunt_> Well, I don't *dis*agree with it.  I suppose I can go along with it. ~
21:39 <@Hellfire667> ->
21:40 <@Hellfire667> Jfs: I also noticed your comment about the qualities the writers of the DD should have.
21:40 <@Hellfire667> one native English speaker, one programmer and someone who is good at keeping track of how several elements might interact with each other
21:40 <@Hellfire667> There are more people than just ChrisCF who have all three qualities ;) ~
21:41 < Grunt_> ->
21:41 <@Hellfire667> Grunt. ~
21:41 < Grunt_> How soon do we expect to start writing the DD? ~
21:41 <+jfs> ->
21:41 <@Hellfire667> jfs. ~
21:41 <+jfs> Grunt_: when the writers are appointed, they just start. simple as that.
21:42 <+jfs> of course, we should get the writers appointed soon.
21:42 < Grunt_> ->
21:42 <+jfs> and i think it would be wise for them to at least post some kind of progress report once in a while~
21:42 <@Hellfire667> ->
21:42 <@Hellfire667> Grunt. ~
21:42 < Grunt_> What are the non-writers going to do while writing is underway? ~
21:42 <@Hellfire667> ->->
21:42 <+jfs> ->
21:43 <@Hellfire667> First. jfs: I agree to get the writers appointed soon. I was hoping for a large crowd so we could have done it right now, but with four active people,
21:43 <@Hellfire667> I don't think it's a good idea to do it now.
21:44 <@Hellfire667> Second. Grunt: non-writers can still do things like making prototypes, example architectures, do research, etc. ~
21:44 <@Hellfire667> jfs. ~
21:44 <+jfs> i'm also afraid too many people will have nothing to do while the DD is being written
21:45 <+jfs> after all, any work done before the DD is finished could potentially be plain wasted
21:45 <+jfs> but of course, it's peoples own decision whether they want to do anything then
21:45 <+Steve^> ->
21:45 <+jfs> ~
21:45 <@Hellfire667> ! I have a phone call... Steve, could you take over untill I'm back? ~
21:45 <+Steve^> Will do.
21:45 <+Steve^> AM i next?
21:45 <+jfs> ! seems so~
21:45 <@Hellfire667> yes. ~
21:45 < Grunt_> ! Steve^. ~
21:46 <+Steve^> Anyone who has read the forums and been to meetings knows generally how the DD will be
21:46 <+Steve^> So they can make prototypes, music, 3D models, EmpireBots, Sock puppets
21:46 <+Steve^> I;m sure we'll find something to do. ~
21:46 <@Hellfire667> ! I'm back :) ~
21:46 <+Steve^> Hellfire667 ~
21:47 <@Hellfire667> I have nothing to comment at the moment. Just that we should elect people this week and get them to work!
21:47 <@Hellfire667> ~
21:47 < Grunt_> ->
21:47 <@Hellfire667> Grunt ~
21:48 < Grunt_> Agree - we should know who our writers are by the next meeting. ~
21:48 <@Hellfire667> Steve, jfs, do you agree too? ~
21:48 <+Steve^> Sure. ~
21:48 <+jfs> ! agree ~
21:48 <@Hellfire667> Excellent. 
21:48 <@Hellfire667> Now, let's get that topic active for the upcoming week!
21:49 <@Hellfire667> Moving right along...
21:49 <@Hellfire667> 7. AOB 
21:49 <@Hellfire667> ~
21:49 <+jfs> none from me~
21:49 <+Steve^> ->
21:49 <@Hellfire667> Stephen. ~
21:49 <+Steve^> I am here on behalf of TycoonBot Industries
21:49 <+Steve^> WOuld you like a bot to represent your fine channel? ~
21:49 <+jfs> ->
21:49 <@Hellfire667> ->
21:49 <@Hellfire667> jfs. ~
21:50 <+jfs> what use would it be? currently, i can't think of anything useful a bot could do... i don't think it could help much if anything in meetings~
21:50 <@Hellfire667> What activities would this TycoonBot perform in this channel? (i.e. the same what jfs asked.) ~
21:50 <+Steve^> Well, simple use: ??meetingrules :)
21:51 <+Steve^> I have plans for meeting controls.. basic keeping logs and such. You could potentially store the agenda, with relevant links
21:51 <+Steve^> So the chair can just go !next, etc
21:51 <@Hellfire667> ->
21:51 <+Steve^> But would nee a permanent host. ~
21:51 <@Hellfire667> That would be handy. Can we test a prototype in one of the next meetings?
21:51 <+jfs> ->
21:51 <@Hellfire667> If a permanent host is needed, perhaps I could arrange that. 
21:52 <@Hellfire667> jfs. ~
21:52 <+Steve^> ->
21:52 <+jfs> i can lend server space on a debian linux server, but i don't want to be the one managing the bot~
21:52 <+Steve^> ->->
21:52 <@Hellfire667> Steve. ~
21:52 <+Steve^> You can. It's being made anyway. Whether you want it or not :)
21:52 <+jfs> ! (my own home-server, usually quite stable) ~
21:52 <+Steve^> Before i ship it off, i'll be adding admin stuff, so i can maintain it where ever it is.
21:52 <+Steve^> That includes settings, logs and such
21:53 <+Steve^> Only problem would be if it dies, it would need someone to restart it. ~
21:53 <@Hellfire667> ->
21:53 <+jfs> ->
21:53 <@Hellfire667> Let's see how it performs first (probably well ;)  ) ~
21:54 <@Hellfire667> jfs.
21:54 <+jfs> i wouldn't mind restarting it once in a while, or writing a shell script to do that, it's more things like initial setup i don't like, nor daily maintenance (i'd probably just give you a shell account really...) ~
21:54 <@Hellfire667> ~
21:55 <@Hellfire667> (Sorry... I hadn't noticed your -> ) ~
21:55 <@Hellfire667> Anything else for AOB? ~
21:56 <+Steve^> ->
21:56 <@Hellfire667> Steve. ~
21:56 <+Steve^> Website? Forums?
21:56 <+Steve^> We gunna leech off soulforge and owen, or move out? ~
21:56 <@Hellfire667> ->
21:56 <@Hellfire667> The former, as long as they are sufficient. ~
21:57 <+Steve^> ->
21:57 <@Hellfire667> Steve. ~
21:57 <+Steve^> I would already say TT-forums is crowded. No offence to Owen, but if we want forums for each group, i don't think it's wise to stay there.
21:57 <+Steve^> ~
21:57 <@Hellfire667> ->
21:58 <@Hellfire667> Do we really need separate forums for each group at this stage?
21:58 <+Steve^> ->
21:58 <@Hellfire667> It's not like we have dozens of developers. ~
21:58 <@Hellfire667> Steve. 
21:58 <@Hellfire667> ~
21:58 <+Steve^> Well, at this stage? No. But wouldn't it be easier to have them now, and use them. Rather than make them later and have to move everything? ~
21:59 < orudge> ->
21:59 <@Hellfire667> orudge. ~
21:59 < orudge> With phpBB 3.0 - I imagine Transport Empire won't have reached a state requiring loads of forums by then - it'll be much easier to organise everything in a clearer way, with proper subforums and so on, but even so, I think the tt-f structure is at least quite logical ~
22:00 <@Hellfire667> ->
22:00 <@Hellfire667> Do they call it phpBB 3.0 now? I thought it was called 2.2... 
22:00 <@Hellfire667> Still
22:00 <@Hellfire667> I think tt-forums is the best place for us to be right now. ~
22:01 <@Hellfire667> ->
22:01 <@Hellfire667> For clarification, I'd like to paste in a piece of a PM I've sent to orudge:
22:02 <@Hellfire667> Last night, we had a meeting. In this meeting, we found a need for our own development forum for Transport Empire. In this new forum, we could discuss technical matters and make decisions on what will be in the game and what not, but without the end-users interfering.
22:02 <@Hellfire667> We could do that in two ways:
22:02 <@Hellfire667>    1. Create a new phpBB forum (or equivalent) on the slow Sourceforge.net webserver
22:02 <@Hellfire667>    2. Stay at Transport Tycoon Forums and request a new forum there.
22:02 <@Hellfire667> Because we'd like to have all information in one place, and because you have a much faster server than sourceforge.net, we would like to ask you to create a new forum, called "Transport Empire Development," for us. After all, Transport Empire is a project created and maintained by members of this forum. Wink 
22:02 <@Hellfire667> ~
22:02 -!- orudge` [orudge@orudge.users.quakenet.org] has joined #transportempire
22:02 <+jfs> ->
22:02 <@Hellfire667> jfs. ~
22:02 <+jfs> should we get a real domainname for the project? eg. transport-empire.org or similar?~
22:03 <@Hellfire667> ->
22:03 < orudge`> ->
22:03 <@Hellfire667> Ultimately, we should and we will. But until then, let's stay at owen's. 
22:03 <@Hellfire667> orudge`.~
22:03 -!- orudge [orudge@orudge.users.quakenet.org] has quit [Ping timeout]
22:03 -!- orudge` is now known as orudge
22:04 < orudge> Just to let you know that if hosting is required, I can provide it if required until you outgrow it ~
22:04 <@Hellfire667> ->
22:04 <@Hellfire667> Is tt-forums hosted on a dedicated server? ~
22:04 < orudge> ->
22:04 <@Hellfire667> orudge. ~
22:04 < orudge> Yes. ~
22:05 < orudge> (short and to the point ;) ~
22:05 -!- Hellfire667 [~s500882@195.240.128.92] has quit [Excess Flood]
22:05 <+jfs> lol~
22:05 -!- Hellfire667 [~s500882@195.240.128.92] has joined #transportempire
22:05 < orudge> Oops, my fault there I think~
22:05 < orudge> Asked him to send me a log~
22:05 < Hellfire667> yep.
22:06 < Hellfire667> That was me pasting the logs into a private window with orudge.
22:06 < Hellfire667> ~
22:06 < Hellfire667> Where were we? ~
22:06 < orudge> Dedicated server, yes, it is ~
22:07 < Hellfire667> ->
22:07 <+Steve^> ->
22:07 < Hellfire667> We can't get anything better than that, for now and for free... 
22:07 < Hellfire667> Steve. ~
22:07 <+Steve^> Will 3.0 allow us to put TEmpire at the top? ~
22:07 < orudge> ->
22:07 < Hellfire667> orudge. ~
22:08 < orudge> What do you mean, a TEmpire theme almost ("The Transport Empire Forums"), or moving the category? ~
22:08 <+Steve^> I mean, it looking like a TEmpire forums for TEmpire people, not TT-Forums and scroll scroll to get to us. ~
22:09 < Hellfire667> ->
22:09 < orudge> ->
22:09 < Hellfire667> If I remember correctly,
22:09 < Hellfire667> phpBB 2.2 had the possibility to assign per-category and per-forum themes. So a TEmpire category could look like a TEmpire forum, where the rest looks like TT-Forums. 
22:09 < Hellfire667> orudge. ~
22:09 < orudge> That is possible, yes, you can have themes for each forum - so "The Transport Empire Forums" can be done, or do an index.php?c=20 like OpenTTD do at the moment ~
22:11 < Hellfire667> Any other questions / business? ~
22:12 < orudge> ->
22:12 < Hellfire667> orudge. ~
22:12 < orudge> Can I get fries with this? ;) ~
22:12 < Hellfire667> No, only rice :P
22:12 < Hellfire667> 8. Close 
22:12 <+Steve^> I want rice. Gimme Rice.
22:12 <+Steve^> ~
22:13 < Hellfire667> Is it necessary to hold an extra meeting next week to put the DD team to work? Or can we suffice with two weeks, which means that they report a week's progress? ~
22:13 <+jfs> ->
22:13 < Hellfire667> jfs. ~
22:13 <+jfs> i think we can wait two weeks until the next meeting, i think the DD writer discussion might require some more work~
22:14 <+Steve^> 2 weeks. ~
22:14 < Hellfire667> Ok then. 2 weeks.
22:14 <+jfs> ->
22:14 < Hellfire667> jfs? ~
22:15 <+jfs> i also suggest making it a sunday that time, since it seems some more people have problems with saturdays, or am I wrong? (thinking of pjay) ~
22:15 < Hellfire667> Ok, I can live with that.
22:15 < Hellfire667> 1930 UTC? So Steve will get a chance to eat :) ~
22:15 <+Steve^> ->
22:15 <+Steve^> 1900 is generally alright on sundays. ~
22:15 < Hellfire667> 1900 then. 
22:16 < Hellfire667> Next meeting: Sunday, April 2 @ 1900 UTC.
22:16 < Hellfire667> Meeting adjourned. ~