[21:05] Well, I guess we could start with the first issue on the agenda: · Appointing minute-keeper (unless someone voulunteers) [21:05] chirho, get your ass overhere [21:05] OK, but it's really just "bing, bash, bing bang bash bash" ;) [21:05] well, roll call first [21:05] I'm here [21:05] I JUST WANT BANG BANG BANG ;) [21:05] !v Bjarni [21:05] * Bot424 sets mode: +v Bjarni [21:06] hyr? [21:06] Hyronymus? [21:06] here [21:06] Iv Hyronymus [21:06] !v Hyronymus [21:06] * Bot424 sets mode: +v Hyronymus [21:06] Jpl? [21:06] * Hellfire[Coder] sets mode: +v Tombe[Music] [21:06] I'm present and correct, SIR! [21:06] http://orudge.no-ip.com/bingbash.mp3 - imagine this looping many times ;) [21:06] (will be a bit slow to download, perhaps) [21:07] !v orudge [21:07] * Bot424 sets mode: +v orudge [21:07] Qton? [21:07] * broodje has joined #tempire [21:07] broodje? [21:07] Reporting for duty, Metalcore[IRC] [21:07] yeah [21:07] !v Qton [21:07] * Bot424 sets mode: +v Qton [21:07] Metalcore[IRC]? [21:07] !v broodje [21:07] * Bot424 sets mode: +v broodje [21:07] roll call [21:07] hmm just in time :D [21:08] * Metalcore[IRC] changes topic to ':: Transport Empire :: Meeting in Progress, /msg Metalcore424 if you want to talk, but you can't. Agenda: http://ttforums.owenrudge.net/viewtopic.php?t=8228 :: www.tt-forums.net :: http://sourceforge.net/projects/tt2/ ::' [21:08] * Metalcore[IRC] sets mode: +m [21:08] hmm, 2-1 [21:08] Let's rock [21:08] So we have present: (in order of mIRC) Hellfire, Metalcore, orudge, Bjarni, broodje, Hyronymus, Qton, Tombe [21:08] seems right [21:09] Still no Chris [21:09] OK, first item on the agenda [21:09] Good. Let's discuss the first item on the agenda: · Appointing minute-keeper (unless someone voulunteers) [21:09] appointing a minutes keeper [21:09] ok, any volunteers? [21:09] I can't, I'm going at about 9:00 [21:09] I'm sorry but I can't find time to do it [21:09] Neither can I, but I could do it next time! [21:10] I may be leaving at 9pm too, like Tombe[Music] [21:10] I'll do it if you just tell me briefly what to do. [21:10] Ok, [21:10] keep minutes :P [21:10] Is it to watch Big Brother? [21:10] It is, funnily enough [21:10] Me too [21:10] Qton: edit the log file from this sessiob [21:10] erase useless stuff from it [21:10] just sum up, briefly, what was said during the meeting. Just summarize the decisions taken, and important stuff that was said. [21:10] ok got it [21:11] and try to post it asap [21:11] in the topic mentioned in the channel topic [21:11] Yeah, that last note is important :) [21:11] Qton, is your IRC client making a log right now? [21:11] ok you'll get it tomorrow morning my time [21:11] yeah it is [21:11] Excellent. [21:12] gonna check the lenght..... [21:12] good deal [21:12] Next item :), · Summary of decisions made on 12/06/2004 [21:12] Up next, Summary of decisions made last time [21:12] Damn you Hellfire, beat me to it [21:12] can someone kill the parrot? [21:12] * Hellfire[Coder] shoots the parrot. [21:12] it's constrained to 512kB [21:12] * Bjarni do as ordered [21:12] should be enough [21:12] I suggest Hellfire[Coder] takes charge and call the agenda items [21:13] Very well... Hyronymus, were you present during the previous meeting? [21:13] I agree. We should make order, not chaos [21:13] I was [21:13] I tried to lead it :) [21:13] Could you sum up the decisions made last time? [21:13] oh boy [21:14] we decided on terrain type [21:14] we thought about hex terrain [21:14] but we decided for (someone help me0 [21:15] squares [21:15] squares [21:15] thanks, Metalcore[IRC] [21:15] 1v jpl [21:15] !v jpl [21:15] * Bot424 sets mode: +v Jpl [21:15] we also decided to attract some new coders but that will be discussed later [21:15] thanks :) [21:16] That's the next item I think [21:16] paltform choice was postponed: we try to keep it as 'open' as possible for the start [21:16] Anything on the UI? [21:16] no, not yet [21:16] a CRC workshop was suggested [21:17] that will be a topic later on too [21:17] I hope chirho will be in by then [21:17] and chochmah offered to help coding with some parts of the project [21:18] UI should be on CRC [21:18] Anything else? [21:18] that's why I refered to it, Jpl [21:18] no, that was all IIRC [21:18] Programmer recruitment, then [21:18] ok, any questions? anyone? [21:19] no [21:19] · Programmer recuitment - did our brief publicity campaign work? [21:19] I think it did [21:19] I could say a few things about this: [21:20] I think it didn't.. ONE programmer responded, with little programming experience, [21:20] which is not bad, considering that the topic was in "General TT" [21:20] But as discussed in the "Programmer recruitment" topic, I asked Spaceman-Spiff to move the topic to the Off-topic forums, because that's the forum which is most visited. [21:20] My suggestion would be to use the SourceForge programmer recruitment service - advertise there, and you're more likely to get a result [21:20] hmm, and if it is posted on the same site as openttd is programmed? [21:21] like owen said :P [21:21] (And as a small bonus, he made the topic sticky :) ) [21:21] two good suggestions I think [21:21] I have a CVS book, which also discusses the Open Source process. [21:21] * Tombe[Music] agrees with Hyro [21:22] In that book, the authors mention, that without an active code base, programmes are less likely to join the project. [21:22] sounds reasonable [21:22] but can't we at least try? [21:22] well maybe it would help if the project has a good goal [21:22] So you think we need to make something first before people want to start joining? [21:22] OTTD didn't really get any developers before it was somewhat playable [21:22] Seems logical... [21:22] Yes, I think we can, but in the recruitment, we should explicitly state that it is a project starting from (almost) scratch. [21:23] ok [21:23] what is it that you want with tempire? [21:23] sounds fair [21:23] That's a bit of a broad question [21:23] make that clear, do you want it modable, just a ttd cloane [21:23] clone* [21:23] 3d/2d [21:23] etc [21:23] I think we want a TT-like game built to our specifications with what we all want in it [21:24] decide on that first, and then advertise [21:24] and do we prefer coders with some affection for TTD like games? [21:24] but people must dare making desicions the [21:24] n [21:24] do we have a codename? [21:24] * Hyronymus agrees with broodje [21:24] Yes, we have a codename: Transport Empire :) [21:24] ;) [21:24] Hyronymus has a good point there [21:24] what point, Tombe[Music]? [21:25] * Hellfire[Coder] agrees with broodje, but some of the things he mentioned have already been decided. [21:25] I think we want programmers if they like TTD and also if they don't even know it at all [21:25] I think we want people who've expressed interest in the project by posting on our forum, which they would have found because they like TTD [21:25] Not some random bunch we found on SourceForge [21:25] Hellfire[Coder] I know, but write that down in a short paper [21:25] ah, that one [21:25] just with points [21:25] and why are there 2 discusions at once? :D [21:26] you started it ;) [21:26] order! order! :P [21:26] oh sory :o [21:26] the question is if we should rule out programmers just because they don't know TTD [21:26] * Tombe[Music] bangs fist loudly on desk [21:26] what if we add that to the agenda: making a document with TE goals [21:26] Good. Let's keep the meeting structured. About the programmers: I think we should take any programmer who is interested in our project. [21:26] Hyr: ok, added :) [21:26] * Bjarni agrees with Hellfire[Coder] [21:27] Hyronymus yes important that point ! [21:27] Hyro, we could incorporate that into 'Discussion of core elements of the game' [21:27] I think that's been agreed upon [21:27] OK [21:27] Hellfire[Coder]: and tsill leave the topic in OT on the forums? [21:27] Yes, we'll leave it there. [21:28] ok [21:28] So we agree that we'll take any programmer who is interested, but do not recruit them on sf.net yet? [21:28] Do you want to move onto the next item, then? [21:29] so all coders that knock on our door should be accpeted [21:29] yes. [21:29] any criteria for once one knocked? [21:29] yup [21:29] open the door [21:29] hehe [21:29] who will contact the guy who volunteered? [21:29] no, no criteria. Yet. [21:29] Good question. [21:29] I said chirho would contact him, but I dunno if he did [21:30] I could do that, until chirho agrees to do it :) [21:30] I think hell should [21:30] he's the mian coder, while chriho is the supervisor [21:31] I think we should appoint a deputy supervisor for when chriho doesn't turn up [21:31] main coder? How about only coder ;) But ok. I'll talk to the "newbies" :) [21:31] :P [21:31] only coder automatic makes you the main coder :P [21:31] ok, solved [21:32] good. Anything to add? [21:32] Or can we continue with the next item on the agenda? [21:32] not from my side [21:32] Next item: · Research Progress - what do we have? [21:32] (Let me check our sourceforge project for that... brb) [21:33] ok [21:34] We have done research into: [21:34] - Autoconf (automagically generating Makefiles) [21:34] - Language options (using GetText for multiple language support) [21:35] - Cross platform libraries (research at 5%) [21:35] Actually, Cross platform was assigned to me, [21:35] so I've been looking at SDL and WxWidgets [21:35] I've done some simple windowing (hello world example) in SDL and WX, and I've done OpenGL in SDL and WX, and from just those two, [21:36] I can conclude that SDL is the way to go. WxWidgets has some issues with OpenGL, which could become a (huge) problem if we would depend on that library. [21:36] Further, [21:36] SDL binaries are very small compared to WX binaries. [21:37] (Let me check the .exe sizes to be sure) [21:37] I recall you wrote about that in the related forum topic [21:37] SDL OpenGL sample: 66 kB [21:37] I remember that too [21:38] WxWidgets OpenGL sample: 1.76 mB [21:38] Wow... [21:38] some notes: are both linked statically? [21:38] So I more or less decided not to support WxWidgets, and go for SDL. Any objections? [21:38] WxWidgets is harder to install on mac than SDL is, since Wx is not a package in Fink [21:38] Nop [21:38] e [21:39] I so I wanted SDL even before you said that [21:39] Jpl: Both are linked at the same way. [21:39] okay. [21:39] Jpl: But WxWidgets can only be linked statically (I think). The compile time is also much longer for WxWidgets. [21:39] how much more research is needed in cross-platform, Hellfire[Coder] [21:40] Hyronymus: unless someone suggests another library, I think we could stick with SDL. [21:40] Hmm, I have to go now actually, sorry... possibly back later [21:40] I'll go with thT [21:40] * orudge has quit IRC (Read error: EOF from client) [21:40] *that [21:41] Bye Owen [21:41] So can we all agree to use SDL? [21:41] That seems like the best idea to me [21:42] SDL it is then [21:42] Very well. SDL it will be (Qton: put that in the minutes, please) :) [21:42] SDL is used in so many projects, so more programmers know how to code it compared to Wx, I think [21:42] True. [21:42] Hellfire it is in [21:43] Hellfire[Coder], was there more in the sourceforge list? [21:43] No, there wasn't [21:43] ok [21:43] should there be more in it? [21:44] Good question. I can think of a number of things, but those items can be added once we actually start coding. [21:44] but can you still name them? [21:44] and when will that be? *sigh* [21:44] (for those of you who are interested, here is the sourceforge task list: http://sourceforge.net/pm/?group_id=73145) [21:44] Yes, I'll name some examples: [21:45] - pathfinding algorithms? (find algorithms, benchmark them) [21:45] - fast and easy storage of game objects? (is there an easier way than arrays?) [21:45] - building placement? [21:45] - ai? [21:45] - randomizing a map? [21:46] ok, stuff like that indeed seems moldable during program devlopment [21:46] I think you should add them and add a comment about that work have on them have not started yet [21:47] it would add clearity [21:47] *clarity [21:47] I agree, [21:47] well can anything be coded now? or should anything else be known before coders can start? [21:47] but at this moment, we should invest our time into some functional requirements of the game. Not the gritty details of how we're going to implement those requirements. [21:48] eg how objects are stored, I gues that must be known before the terain engine can be made? [21:48] Broodje: what we have on requirements is a big mess (several topics, with ideas stored in posts...) [21:49] another thing that should be sorted then [21:49] :) [21:49] hmm any volentears? [21:49] I think somebody should be assigned to store all of those in a nice order [21:49] all requirements or all wishes for TE? [21:49] if I get around 2 weeks I might be able to do it, but nect week will be full again [21:49] pretty much the same for m [21:49] e [21:50] so you guys gotta choose :) [21:50] And for me. Last two weeks of school :) [21:50] same here :D [21:50] this is a free weekend, but monday will be full again :/ [21:50] although I might be able to do it tuesday evening [21:50] But can we postpone this decision 'till after the next item on the agenda? [21:51] On that subject, I finish school on Tuesday so after that I can go mad making muzak [21:51] I think so [21:51] (next items on agenda: · What should be consider core features of the game? [21:51] · Writing of design documents (related to previous topic IMHO) [21:51] sounds related :) [21:51] Yeah, finally something I understand [21:52] Shame I have to go in 5 [21:52] Let's move to the next item: core features. We'll make up new research items along the way. :) [21:52] ok [21:52] hang on, I'll open notepad [21:52] you never know what might turn up [21:52] hmm, maybe a list should be made with the till now done sugestions? [21:52] Let me just say at this point [21:53] so there can be voted or something [21:53] We should avoid making the game overly complicated, keep it simple [21:53] yep ofcourse :) [21:53] I can't see anything on the research page on SF :( [21:53] but that lies mostley in the gui [21:53] We don't want all crap like accurate economic models and stuff, because it'll make the game less fun to play [21:53] gui and detail of processes [21:53] Tombe[Music], some people do [21:54] but the CORE should be simple [21:54] we could have a switch to enable or disable realistic economy model [21:54] Most people don't though, you have to remember that not everyone who will stumble across this game is a hardcore transport enthusiast [21:54] well those are all way to advanced sugestions I think [21:54] I go with Qton's idea [21:54] offtopic: It just popped into my mind that we have two mailing lists for TE, check http://sourceforge.net/mail/?group_id=73145 [21:54] Qton, perhaps a 'Realistic' mode and a 'Sandbox' mode? [21:55] sure [21:55] * broodje wants to brake in, is this discusion on this agenda point? [21:55] we can decide the naming later [21:55] I mean it isn't importand atm [21:55] and fairly easy discusion point [21:55] true [21:55] OK, let's move on [21:56] let's go bacn to core game features [21:56] Perhaps Qton's suggestion could be extended a little bit. Like in TTD, we can choose different difficulty levels, and several options. Settings on Economic model, Physical model, etc could be selecte before a game is started. [21:56] and write some down [21:56] I have a suggestion, not sure if it's relevant at this point [21:56] We should balance the transport modes a bit more, because in TTD everyone uses trains and planes [21:56] This could actualy be a core feature.. called customizable difficulty level. [21:57] Okay: Core feature: extensibility. Being able to add stuff to the game without recompiling or having to remove other stuff (nice and abstract, but try to replace "Stuff" by "Vehicles" for example) [21:57] Because road vehicles and boats are so bloody useless [21:57] You mean easily moddable, Hellfire? [21:57] Hellfire[Coder] languages in seperate files [21:57] modularity? [21:57] Anyway, I have to go now [21:57] Take care guys [21:57] modularity is something different. [21:57] Bye [21:57] Bye [21:57] vehicles per train/set [21:57] * Tombe[Music] has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer) [21:58] buy to [21:58] maybe even skinable gui? [21:58] or even more advanced gui [21:58] Core feature: Multiplayer games up to 8/16/32??? players. [21:58] is that a core feature? [21:58] like winamp 5 has [21:58] at least 4 players, as a start, I'd say [21:58] ships would be better if payment for bulk freight didn't depend so much on time in transfer. Who cares if it takes 2 or 3 days for coal to arrive. It's not like it gets too old ;) [21:58] broodje: is that really necessary? [21:59] Hellfire[Coder] no not at all, but it is a point to think abnout :D [21:59] Weather [21:59] guys: core features please [21:59] eh, core [21:59] pathfinding [21:59] pathfinding is a detail :) [21:59] but I think trains (eg 3d models+ratings and such) should be in seperate files? [21:59] core people no cosmetics! [21:59] same for language files [21:59] broodje: core plz [22:00] even more core :o [22:00] Hyronymus: broodje has a point here! [22:00] I'd consider pathfinding core >_> [22:00] well it is in the base program [22:00] Let me broaden it a little bit: [22:01] The database of vehicles/objects/graphics should be stored in separate files in a directory structure (note that this is a suggestion, not a decision :) ) [22:01] Textfiles* [22:01] flexibility [22:01] yes [22:01] let's decide upon it directly [22:01] So Hyr, what do we have so far? [22:02] - Extensibility. Being able to add vehicles and such to the game without recompiling or hav- [22:02] ing to remove other vehicles). [22:02] - Multiplayer games: up to 8/16/32??? players. [22:02] - Flexibility: The database of vehicles/objects/graphics should be stored in separate files [22:02] in a directory structure. [22:02] how about 3D Environment [22:02] Hmm. Extensibility and Flexibility cover the same core feature :) [22:02] very few limits, period [22:03] no maximum number of stations, etc, except limited by memory [22:03] That's a good one: being able to make more complex games as computing power rises over the years :) [22:04] how would you call that? [22:04] Heuristic programming? [22:04] no... umm... [22:04] Very high limits or something ... [22:04] :P [22:05] memory-bound limits [22:05] hard limits far exeeding practical limits [22:05] Qton: nice one. Hyr: write it down like that :) [22:05] I like that, Qton [22:05] I thought im the minute man and not hyr. [22:06] cross platform [22:06] Im writing all the major stuff down all the time.. [22:06] Qton: only making a doucment [22:06] seperate from the minutes [22:06] Sorry Qton :) I said Hyr, because he was listing the core features. [22:06] This of course should all be in the minutes though [22:06] that document can grow where the minutes can't [22:07] is cross platform a core feature too? [22:07] sure [22:08] yep. And we just decided to fill in the details of that feature using SDL :) [22:08] - Cross-platform support: Windows, *nix and Mac support through SDL. [22:08] Another core feature: 3D engine, using a rotateable view on the map. What will we use? Orthogonal or Perspective? Rein liked orthogonal, but since we ditched him... ;) [22:09] ortho is best [22:09] easy to get used too [22:09] ortho [22:09] but perspective looks more natural [22:09] nice scaling properties [22:09] me goes for perspective [22:09] maybe a nice thing for a poll? [22:09] we wanna vote now? [22:09] let's vote then, right now. [22:10] I vote for perspective! [22:10] wait amin [22:10] I'll sarch some examples [22:10] we need order [22:10] Ok, postponing it is. Put a poll on the forums :) [22:10] bah [22:11] ok [22:11] Any thing else for the core features? [22:11] hmm [22:12] hmm, 3dformat? :D [22:12] nice for the modelers to know :) [22:12] 3ds? [22:12] That's a detail. [22:13] dang :P [22:13] We could write converters or import libraries for each 3d formats. (3ds, lightwave, blender, etc) [22:13] gui? [22:13] that's a detail too [22:13] ok [22:13] hmm gui is dificult, you first have to know a bit what you want [22:13] license type [22:13] gpl [22:14] or lgpl [22:14]