22:23 < Hyronymus> I prefer to open the meeting, hush everyone! 22:23 < Hyronymus> todays agenda 22:24 < Hyronymus> * Discuss minutes of the 090105 meeting 22:24 < Hyronymus> * Pick new minutes man 22:24 < Hyronymus> * Website/Wiki related issues 22:24 < Hyronymus> * General project evaluation 22:24 < Hyronymus> * FRD (comment on rewritten part) 22:24 < Hyronymus> * Final discussion / comments on destinations 22:24 < Hyronymus> * New featured discussion 22:24 < Hyronymus> * Prototype progress 22:24 < Hyronymus> * Music discussion 22:24 < Hyronymus> * AOB 22:24 < Hyronymus> * Setting new date + agenda 22:24 < Hyronymus> I almost forgot a convenicne note 22:24 < Zuu> Old agenda? 22:24 < Hyronymus> if you're done typing and allow others to type, please end with a ~ 22:25 < Zuu> Music discussion == old 22:25 < Zuu> ~ 22:25 < Hyronymus> I put it on the agenda to be sure 22:25 < Hyronymus> I thought tombe would come 22:25 < Hyronymus> obviously I was wrong 22:25 < Hyronymus> shall we delete the music discussion?~ 22:25 <@Hellfire667> ok~ 22:26 < Zuu> ok~ 22:26 -!- Hellfire[Coder] [~jeroen@195.240.128.92] has joined #tempire 22:26 <@Hellfire667> :) 22:26 <@Hellfire667> I'm gonna switch pc's... Hellfire[Coder] is my laptop... 22:26 <@Hellfire667> ~ 22:26 < Hyronymus> ok 22:26 -!- Hellfire667 [~chatzilla@195.240.128.92] has quit [Read error: EOF from client] 22:27 < Hyronymus> well, first real point: the minutes from the previous meeting 22:27 < Hyronymus> did anyone have comments on them?~ 22:27 < Zuu> no~ 22:27 * Hellfire[Coder] has not~ 22:27 < Hyronymus> jfs, do you? 22:27 < jfs> no~ 22:27 -!- mode/#tempire [+o Hellfire[Coder]] by L 22:27 -!- Hellfire[Coder] is now known as Hellfire667 22:28 < Hyronymus> Mek_? 22:28 < Hyronymus> weni? 22:28 < weni> please ignore me in general discussion as i'm new here, i'll be just reading~ 22:28 < Hyronymus> ok 22:28 < jfs> i don't know how active i'll be either~ 22:28 < Hyronymus> nice :( 22:28 < Hyronymus> ChrisCF is on a beer binge with friends 22:28 <@Hellfire667> I'll be active :) ~ 22:28 < jfs> but i'll try to come with inputs as often as possible... ~ 22:29 < Hyronymus> he's celebarting his 21st bday 22:29 < Hyronymus> Metalcore, inactive too? 22:29 < Hyronymus> well, that narrows down the pool for the new minute maker 22:29 < Hyronymus> anyone volunteering?~ 22:29 <@Hellfire667> hehe 22:30 * Hellfire667 is volunteering, BUT: the minutes will be done at the end of the week. ~ 22:30 < Hyronymus> can we agree on that~? 22:30 * Zuu acept that 22:30 <@Hellfire667> Today's logs can be found @ http://jpl.yi.org/~jpl/tempire/tempire-2005-01-23.txt ~ 22:30 < Hyronymus> and the rest doesn't care :D` 22:31 < weni> I care, but I don't know what 'minute maker' is~ 22:31 < Hyronymus> ok 22:31 -!- pjaytycy [~pjaytycy@dD5772E4A.access.telenet.be] has joined #tempire 22:31 < jfs> oh hi pjaytycy! ~ 22:31 < Hyronymus> weni: each meeting we make short notes on what has been said 22:31 <@Hellfire667> weni, do you visit tt-forums? 22:31 < Hyronymus> aka minutes 22:31 -!- pjaytycy [~pjaytycy@dD5772E4A.access.telenet.be] has left #tempire [] 22:31 < Hyronymus> hi pjaytycy. 22:31 < weni> Hellfire667: sure 22:31 -!- pjaytycy [~pjaytycy@dD5772E4A.access.telenet.be] has joined #tempire 22:32 < Hyronymus> stay, pjaytycy ;) 22:32 < Zuu> pjaytycy: will you be at the meeting? 22:32 <@Hellfire667> Ok, then you will find the minutes posted in the topic for this night's meeting. 22:32 <@Hellfire667> ~ 22:32 < Hyronymus> Ill send you a link in a while, weni 22:32 < Hyronymus> to see what we mean~ 22:32 -!- pjaytycy [~pjaytycy@dD5772E4A.access.telenet.be] has quit [Quit] 22:33 < Hyronymus> I would like to propose to assign a minutes man at the end of meetings from now on 22:33 < Hyronymus> this takes too long IMO 22:33 < Hyronymus> anyone against?~ 22:33 < jfs> fine by me~ 22:33 < Zuu> Wasnt Hellfire667 selected? 22:33 -!- pjaytycy [~pjaytycy@dD5772E4A.access.telenet.be] has joined #tempire 22:33 < pjaytycy> hello 22:34 < weni> hello 22:34 < Hyronymus> hi pjaytycy 22:34 <@Hellfire667> Ok... But I volunteered, right? ~ 22:34 < Zuu> Ok 22:34 < Hyronymus> Zuu, hellfire is indeed the minute man for now 22:34 < Hyronymus> but for future meetings I think it wouldn't harm to know who will be doing it before the meeting starts~ 22:34 < Zuu> ok 22:34 < Zuu> ~ 22:35 < Hyronymus> then we accepted this proposal 22:35 < Hyronymus> let's move on to the first agenda point 22:35 < Hyronymus> * Website/Wiki related issues~ 22:35 < jfs> yes there is a bug on the wiki 22:35 < jfs> on the front page 22:36 < jfs> it says "251 of 246" 22:36 < jfs> iirc 22:36 < jfs> ~ 22:36 < Zuu> :) 22:36 < Hyronymus> that's not a bug 22:36 < Hyronymus> it's the truth 22:36 < Hyronymus> some ideas have been split-up 22:36 < Hyronymus> no accurate counting was decided on them so we ended up with more ideas than we started with~ 22:37 < jfs> it looks strange, so i suggest changing it to something more sensible~ 22:37 < Zuu> no, I like it. 22:37 < Zuu> but soon it will disapear anyway.~ 22:37 < Hyronymus> it looks strange but there is more wicked stuff on the wiki~ 22:37 < pjaytycy> I don't care about it~ 22:37 < jfs> no matter if an idea was split up or not, it has still been processed once and just once~ 22:37 < Hyronymus> I'm really concerned about setting milestones 22:38 < Hyronymus> why aren't there still no milestones specified?~ 22:38 < pjaytycy> Hyronymus, because nobody has any idea about what this game should/will become 22:38 < Zuu> Becuse we hardly havn't specified any. (I think)~ 22:38 < pjaytycy> ~ 22:38 < Hyronymus> what would be a sensible milestone?~ 22:38 <@Hellfire667> they should be there... We've set some a couple of meetings ago~ 22:39 < jfs> "design document finished" is also a milestone~ 22:39 < Zuu> Hellfire667: thats true. 22:39 < Hyronymus> hasn't that been finished ages ago, jfs?~ 22:39 < jfs> if we're still discussing the ideas for how the game should be 22:39 < jfs> then it hasn't been finished yet, 22:40 < jfs> as that's exactly my idea of what a design document it. ~ 22:40 < Hyronymus> isn't that the FRD we're discussing?~ 22:40 < Zuu> jfs: in this project a spefic document is called design doc which was compleated ages ago. 22:40 < pjaytycy> Hyronymus, I don't think we have actually discussed the ideas in the FRD yet 22:41 <+jpl> ooh 22:41 < pjaytycy> and, that's maybe one of the biggest progress-stoppers for this project 22:41 < Hyronymus> true, pjaytycy~ 22:41 < pjaytycy> ~ 22:41 < jfs> so, we should set one or more milestones as soon as possible, everyone agree? ~ 22:41 * Hellfire667 agrees~ 22:41 <+jpl> yes! some progress is needed 22:41 * Hyronymus agrees but wants to set one today~ 22:41 < Zuu> I agree ~ 22:42 < Hyronymus> overviewing the state of the project, what will be a milestone within reach?~ 22:42 < jfs> so, 22:42 <@Hellfire667> today's milestone to work towards: finish frd and start making an architecture. Good suggestion?~ 22:43 < Zuu> kinda good~ 22:43 < jfs> would "a document specifying the gameplay in the basic version of the game" be a good milestone? 22:43 < pjaytycy> hellfire, you can't do that in 2 hours on a sunday evening !~ 22:43 < Hyronymus> sounds good Hellfire667 but what was jfs planning to say?! 22:43 < jfs> ~ 22:43 <@Hellfire667> pjaytycy: "work towards" ;)~ 22:43 < Hyronymus> jfs, would such a document be based on the frd and dd?~ 22:43 < jfs> i suggest not thiking so much about software implementation until we have a clear idea of the user perspective on the game~ 22:44 < Hyronymus> I'm loosing overview and don't get replies 22:44 < Hyronymus> jfs, explain your suggestion a bit more~ 22:44 < jfs> well, 22:45 < jfs> it is what would usually be called a design document, 22:45 < jfs> but it apaprently can't here, since we have something else that's called that 22:45 < jfs> but, 22:45 < jfs> it would be a document about what the game "can do" 22:45 < jfs> and what it can't do 22:45 < Hyronymus> and should it replace the existing DD?~ 22:46 < weni> maybe some "use cases"?~ 22:46 < jfs> something we can base a discussion of further features on~ 22:46 < jfs> yes use cases sounds good~ 22:46 < Hyronymus> explain use cases~ 22:46 < pjaytycy> use cases = small scenario's of gameplay 22:46 < pjaytycy> ~ 22:47 < Hyronymus> ah, ok 22:47 < Hyronymus> makes sense now~ 22:47 < pjaytycy> (eg: player clicks "build station" - mouse pointer changes to station picture - user points to spot on the map - user clicks - station gets placed ) 22:47 < pjaytycy> some thing like that~ 22:47 < jfs> "use cases" is actually more of a HCI term so it might not fit perfectly in this case but it's useable~ 22:47 < Zuu> HCI? 22:48 < jfs> human computer interface 22:48 < Hyronymus> does someone not agree with this 'milestone'. I guess Hellfire667's idea was a bit different~ 22:48 < jfs> the term for useability research and similar~ 22:48 <@Hellfire667> I can agree to this "milestone".~ 22:49 < jfs> my argument for this milestone is that we can't code anything before we have a clear defition of what we should be coding towards~ 22:49 <+jpl> ~ ? 22:49 < Hyronymus> ok, everyone please say agree or disagree 22:49 < Zuu> agree~ 22:49 < jfs> agree~ 22:49 * Hyronymus agrees~ 22:49 < pjaytycy> before I vote, I would like more specific info about it 22:50 < pjaytycy> like how do you want to get to such a design doc ?~ 22:50 <@Hellfire667> write it from the frd.~ 22:50 < Hyronymus> that's a fair question~ 22:50 < jfs> one or two persons should work to create it~ 22:50 < Hyronymus> in that case I have something to mention later on :p~ 22:50 < jfs> as was suggested on the forum (who made that suggestion again?) ~ 22:50 < Zuu> me I think 22:50 < Zuu> or bret 22:51 < Zuu> ~ 22:51 < pjaytycy> if we create it from discussing the frd, jfs's milestone == hellfire's milestone, so I would agree :-) 22:51 < Hyronymus> satisfied, pjaytycy?~ 22:51 < pjaytycy> I think we should at least be able to all voice our opinions about the ideas in the FRD before 2 people start writing the design doc 22:52 < Hyronymus> that was my line, pjaytycy~ 22:52 < jfs> after a draft has been written by those people, people can ask question it and they will have to defend or change it, i think is a good approach ~ 22:52 < Hyronymus> but first things first 22:52 < pjaytycy> but, I agree some kind of design doc is what we need now first 22:52 < Hyronymus> we decided to set as milestone the development of a Design Document 22:52 < Hyronymus> this DD will be the basis of our first architecture 22:53 < Hyronymus> correct?~ 22:53 < jfs> yes 22:53 < pjaytycy> yes~ 22:53 <+jpl> so we are going straight to architecture? ~ 22:53 < Hyronymus> oh: the DD will be based on the FRD input 22:53 < jfs> once the design document is finished it will never be modified~ 22:53 < Zuu> me want to say something 22:54 < Hyronymus> ok, you got that too, Hellfire667?~ 22:54 <@Hellfire667> Yes. got it.~ 22:54 <@Hellfire667> Although I have a comment, but zuu first.~ 22:54 < Hyronymus> Zuu, the stage is yours 22:54 < Hyronymus> ~ 22:55 < Zuu> I think It would bee good if we discuss some things of the FRDbefore these two people create the DD. T minimize double work. 22:55 < Zuu> Ie delete all 1 and 2 class ideas if noone wants them.~ 22:55 < Hyronymus> yes, but that's better to discuss during the FRD topic perhaps?~ 22:56 < Hyronymus> anyone?~ 22:56 < Zuu> Discussion have to take place afterwards too, but if we can remove ideas that take alot space, that noone wants we can save work.~ 22:56 < Hyronymus> I agree on that 22:57 < Hyronymus> I was really planning to get the FRD main attention anyhow 22:57 < pjaytycy> Zuu, since they are in the FRD, *somebody* wants them ~ 22:57 * Hellfire667 agrees too~ 22:57 < Hyronymus> it needs scrutiny but more about that later 22:57 < Hyronymus> Hellfire667, what was your idea?~ 22:57 < jfs> i have something to say as well ~ 22:58 < Zuu> jfs about wiki/web? 22:58 < Hyronymus> Hellfire667 first, jfs, count to 1000 ;)~ 22:58 <@Hellfire667> I didn't have an idea, just a comment on jfs: If the design document is finished, it should in the ideal case not be modified, but what if someone has a great idea? Then we should add it. 22:58 <@Hellfire667> ~ 22:58 < jfs> about design document as well~ 22:58 < Hyronymus> then we should vote about it and add it if we agreed on it~ 22:59 < Hyronymus> what was your point, jfs?~ 22:59 < jfs> well, the purpose of the design document should be to have a solid, self-consistent description of what the game should be like. 22:59 < jfs> so it cannot just be composed of random ideas 22:59 < jfs> and it can't easily be modified 23:00 < jfs> because that could bring in inconsistencies 23:00 < jfs> ~ 23:00 < pjaytycy> jfs, it's no problem to provide "modifiabillity" in you design doc as an important issue 23:01 < pjaytycy> it just means "modifiabillity" has to be present in the architecture as well. ~ 23:01 < Hyronymus> that's one of the hallmarks of TE IIRC~ 23:01 < jfs> i was talking about modifying the design doc, not adding game data~ 23:02 < Zuu> I think jfs have a point. 23:02 < jfs> but am I wrong that the goal of this project is to create a full game and not just a game engine that is first useful once someone bothers to create a full set of game data? ~ 23:02 < Hyronymus> I guess it's best to see the DD as the bible of our project 23:02 < Hyronymus> you write it once and try not to mess with it~ 23:02 < Hyronymus> you're not wrong, jfs~ 23:03 < Hyronymus> how about us moving on to FRD now? 23:03 < jfs> ok i suggest leaving this subject where it is and make it a separate topic on the next meeting. ~ 23:03 < Zuu> hmm 23:03 < Hyronymus> it's not the proper agenda order but I think it makes sense~ 23:03 < Zuu> dont forget "General project evaluation" 23:03 <@Hellfire667> Ok. FRD it is.. ~ 23:04 < Hyronymus> sorry but not yet 23:04 < Zuu> Hyronymus: ok 23:04 < Hyronymus> jfs, I rather have things decided now if we can 23:04 < Zuu> sure 23:04 < Hyronymus> why you want to wait until next time?~ 23:04 < Hyronymus> that are again 2 'lost' weeks~ 23:04 < jfs> ok point taken~ 23:05 < Hyronymus> I believe we all said we want a DD to be written 23:05 < Hyronymus> what function should it have~ 23:06 < jfs> like you said, be a "bible" for the project 23:06 < Hyronymus> ok 23:06 < pjaytycy> we didn't decide "how" or "who", but I guess that'll come later in the meeting :-) 23:06 < Zuu> Be that base for the AD. + the bible 23:06 < Hyronymus> and how do we deal with new interesting ideas?~ 23:06 < jfs> a reference everyone can point to and use for arguing for/against future suggestions ~ 23:06 < Hyronymus> pjaytycy, yes it will~ 23:07 < Hyronymus> ok, that's alot clearer already jfs 23:07 < Hyronymus> can we agree on that functionality of the DD: 'a reference everyone can point to and use for arguing for/against future suggestions'?~ 23:07 -!- Steve- [~Stephen@DarkPho.users.quakenet.org] has joined #tempire 23:07 -!- mode/#tempire [+v Steve-] by L 23:07 * Hyronymus welcomes Steve- 23:07 < jfs> it should basically be like the constitution for a nation 23:08 < Zuu> I agree 23:08 < jfs> have the same "legal" effect (it can't be overridden) 23:08 * Zuu grabs the bread and the cheese... 23:08 < jfs> and it is very hard to modify ~ 23:08 < Hyronymus> what say you, Hellfire667, pjaytycy and weni? 23:08 < pjaytycy> I agree, move on... 23:08 <@Hellfire667> A bible/constitution sounds good.~ 23:09 < weni> new ideas should only be as addition, they cant modiffy old ideas 23:09 <@Hellfire667> It's a good thing to have a set of constants to hold on to.~ 23:09 < weni> ~ 23:09 * Zuu is watching you 23:09 < Hyronymus> ok, then we agreed on this too now 23:09 < Hyronymus> what else is required to define a good DD?~ 23:10 < pjaytycy> a big part of the team should agree with it's contents, so no devellopers are "lost" ~ 23:10 <@Hellfire667> clarity. structure. completness. 23:10 <@Hellfire667> ~ 23:10 < jfs> i agree with Hellfire667 ~ 23:10 * Zuu is putting back the cheese... 23:10 <@Hellfire667> Nice pictures so new devs know what we're talking about.~ 23:10 < Hyronymus> let me try to repharse that 23:10 < jfs> it has to be thoroughly reviewed by everyone involved in the project ~ 23:11 * Zuu is back 23:11 <@Metalcore> !ak Zuu 23:11 < weni> when there are two points of view on something DD should clarify what point of view to choose 23:11 < Hyronymus> the dd should be a well-structured, easy-to-read document that is complete and approved by all devs 23:11 < weni> ~ 23:12 < Hyronymus> did anyone notice wha I typed :p?~ 23:12 < Hyronymus> the dd should be a well-structured, easy-to-read document that is complete and approved by all devs 23:12 < Hyronymus> ~ 23:12 <@Hellfire667> That sums it uip qauite nicely.~ 23:12 < jfs> i agree ~ 23:12 <+Steve-> ~~ 23:12 < Hyronymus> DD - 1 bump ;) 23:12 < jfs> :D~~~ 23:12 < Hyronymus> anything the else the DD should have/be?~ 23:13 < jfs> how about what it should NOT be?~ 23:13 * Hellfire667 can't think of anything else. I think it's good this way.~ 23:13 < pjaytycy> it needs a writer~ 23:13 <@Hellfire667> hehe~ 23:13 < Hyronymus> jfs, give it a shot 23:13 < Zuu> little more order plz. 23:13 < Hyronymus> thinking from the opposite point of view can be refreshing~ 23:14 <@Hellfire667> It should not be an architecture document~ 23:14 < jfs> i don't think it should specify very specific entities in the game, such as actual climates present, vehicles and such 23:14 < jfs> ~ 23:14 < Hyronymus> little more chees, Zuu ;)~ 23:14 <@Hellfire667> No UML.~ 23:14 < pjaytycy> what it should not be: a description about content (like Zuu said) 23:14 < Hyronymus> Hellfire667, explain no architecture doc~ 23:14 <@Hellfire667> It does not describe the structure of the code we're going to write.~ 23:14 < Hyronymus> ok 23:15 < Hyronymus> then a question to jfs 23:15 < pjaytycy> it just describes the game from a players point of view 23:15 < Hyronymus> it has to be general and complete?~ 23:15 <+Steve-> Make sure to end each line with a ~ 23:15 < Hyronymus> mute Steve- ;)~ 23:16 < Hyronymus> aren't general and complete opposing ends, jfs?~ 23:16 < jfs> yes that is a problem... ~ 23:16 < Hyronymus> and how do we solve it?~ 23:16 < jfs> i don't know, honestly 23:16 < jfs> but 23:16 <@Hellfire667> choose complete.~ 23:16 < jfs> what i was thiking was, that it shouldn't say eg 23:17 < jfs> "the game has a foobar2000 train engine which runs on railroad with a 3rd rail for electricity, this engine has a blue livery" 23:17 < jfs> ~ 23:18 < Hyronymus> no, that would be quite wrong 23:18 < Zuu> Hyronymus: ~? 23:18 < Hyronymus> then I think it would be better to say it shouldn't be specific~ 23:19 * Hyronymus feels like he lost half of the attendants 23:19 <@Hellfire667> I'm still here! :)~ 23:19 * pjaytycy is still here 23:19 < weni> I'm still here~ 23:19 * jfs 2 ~ 23:19 < pjaytycy> I was thinking about the opposites complete<=>general ~ 23:19 < Hyronymus> and what did you find, pjaytycy~?~ 23:20 <@Hellfire667> I don't think complete and general are opposites. Specific is the opposite of general.~ 23:20 < jfs> so where is the line "too specific"? ~ 23:20 < pjaytycy> nothing yet, that's why I didn't say anything, but I have "the feeling" they are not really opposite~ 23:20 < jfs> where do we draw it?~ 23:20 < Zuu> jfs: goog queestion~ 23:20 < Hyronymus> ok, then I might be wrong but we would strill need a rule to define what is too specific indeed 23:20 < Zuu> jfs: good queestion~ 23:21 < Hyronymus> perhaps saying trains will be included is ok 23:21 < Hyronymus> but not saying which trains?~ 23:21 * Hellfire667 agrees~ 23:21 < jfs> "the design document has to be a complete, not-too-specific document specifying the overall game experience."~ 23:21 < Hyronymus> as an example~ 23:21 < Hyronymus> the design document has to be a complete, not-too-specific document specifying the overall game experience, approved by all devs.~ 23:22 < pjaytycy> everything content-related would be too specific, we decided in the previous meeting all content should be provided in "climate packs" 23:22 < Hyronymus> we did? /me has a leaking memory~ 23:22 < jfs> ok, i have an idea 23:22 < jfs> i think 23:22 < Hyronymus> shoot!~ 23:22 < pjaytycy> but describing the different transportation methods (eg : trains, ships, ...) would be good to include ~ 23:23 < Zuu> and that rails can be built on roads, without using the word tram?~ 23:23 < jfs> eg. saying "train track can be electrified" is too specific, while saying "track can have accessories which may be required for some vehicles to run on it. example: electrified train track." is not 23:23 < Hyronymus> that sounds decent, jfs~ 23:24 < Hyronymus> I think we found a standard then~ 23:24 < Hyronymus> Hellfire667, can you give a summary?~ 23:24 < Hyronymus> (please be silent everyone) 23:24 < Zuu> so on my question it would be no then?~ 23:25 < jfs> we will have to discuss the DD after a first draft has been written anyway.~ 23:25 <@Hellfire667> Ok... Let's see... 23:25 <@Hellfire667> The next milestone will be writing a design document, 23:25 * Steve- tests 23:26 <@Hellfire667> which will be a complete, not-too-specific document specifying the overall game experience. 23:26 <@Hellfire667> It will be easy to read, so future devs can easily join the team. 23:26 <@Hellfire667> Also, all devs should agree on the document after reviewing it. 23:26 <@Hellfire667> ~ 23:26 < pjaytycy> @zuu: you could write "different types of transport-track / roads can be combined or cross each other" , without specifying the types involved. This makes it general and complete.~ 23:26 < jfs> how about the "bible/constitution" part ? 23:27 < jfs> ~ 23:27 < Hyronymus> you forgot something, Hellfire667 :P~ 23:27 <@Hellfire667> Ah yes... It will be regarded as the bible of the project. ~ 23:27 < Hyronymus> :)~ 23:27 < Hyronymus> Now I believe Zuu had aquestion which I totally ignored (bad me).Zuu?~ 23:28 < Zuu> pjaytycy answered it. 23:28 < Hyronymus> ok 23:28 < Hyronymus> can we all agree on the definition of the DD?~ 23:28 < Zuu> yes 23:28 <@Hellfire667> yse~ 23:28 < pjaytycy> yes (for the umpteenth time) 23:29 < pjaytycy> ~ 23:29 < jfs> may i? 23:29 < Hyronymus> sure jfs~ 23:29 < jfs> i am making a rewording of what Hellfire667 wrote before 23:29 < jfs> on my take of the DD 23:29 < jfs> i will say when it's done (a few minutes) ~ 23:29 < Hyronymus> ok, I want to move on in the mean time though 23:30 < Hyronymus> as I proposed before: * FRD (comment on rewritten part) 23:30 < Hyronymus> may I start?~ 23:30 < Hyronymus> good 23:30 < Zuu> lol 23:31 < Hyronymus> I've rewritten the FRD as much as needed and as much as possible 23:31 < Hyronymus> I'm pleased to say that the Gameplay part is well devoped 23:31 < Hyronymus> however, other sections could've been deleted as well 23:31 < pjaytycy> ? 23:32 < Hyronymus> well, some sections contain almost no data 23:32 < Hyronymus> try checking some FRD section outside the Gameplay chapter 23:32 < Hyronymus> anyhow 23:32 < Hyronymus> the gameplay section still gives home to inconsistensies 23:33 < Hyronymus> it's just too much work and irresponsible either to match all ideas 23:33 < Hyronymus> to get the FRD a decent status I thought of a scutiny taskforce 23:33 < Hyronymus> much against everyone desire we're all in the taskforce 23:34 < Hyronymus> I suggest everyone reads the FRD VERY CAREFULLY at least once 23:34 < Hyronymus> after reading it I suggest you put your personal discoveries on the discussion page 23:35 < Hyronymus> sofar so good? 23:35 < Hyronymus> ~ 23:35 < jfs> i'm done ~ 23:35 < Zuu> will move my +add more personal stuff then.~ 23:35 < Hyronymus> (there is more) 23:35 < Hyronymus> hang on jfs~ 23:35 < jfs> i can wait~ 23:35 < Hyronymus> I hope we can all read the FRD before next weekend 23:36 < pjaytycy> no problem 23:36 < Zuu> no problems here too 23:36 < Hyronymus> my plan is to check up the discussions and post them on the forum as next step 23:36 < jfs> fine by me~ 23:36 < pjaytycy> (I've read before this meeting already) 23:36 <@Hellfire667> ok here 23:36 <@Hellfire667> ~ 23:36 < Hyronymus> all in polls 23:36 * weni read it today 23:36 < Hyronymus> I want people to vote on the polls so we can eradicate doubles for once and for all 23:37 < Hyronymus> problem however: I only ant devs to vote 23:37 <@Hellfire667> If they're on the forums, people will vote. 23:37 <@Hellfire667> ~ 23:37 <@Hellfire667> Then we vote on the wiki :)~ 23:37 < Hyronymus> but this is my proposal, please tell me whether yo agree on it~ 23:37 < Zuu> dont use polls, let peple post, and count posts manually. 23:37 < Zuu> ~ 23:37 < jfs> make it a post-vote, ie. people post their answer instead of click an option ~ 23:38 < jfs> i agree~ 23:38 < Hyronymus> zuu and jfs, you mean the same I guess?!~ 23:38 < Zuu> I think so 23:38 < jfs> i think so yes :)~ 23:38 < Zuu> ~ 23:38 < pjaytycy> I think it's important to have a solid conclusion, with voting, sometimes one poll will have a majority for 1 option, while the other has a majority for an option that doesn't really fit~ 23:38 < Hyronymus> letting people post their discussion and directly tell what they favour?~ 23:39 < jfs> yes 23:39 < Hyronymus> would that be a solution?~ 23:39 < jfs> and if i understood pjaytycy right 23:39 < jfs> forget it~ 23:40 < Hyronymus> lol, ok 23:40 < Hyronymus> it's important to read the FRD before next weekend though 23:40 < Hyronymus> in the next week (last week before next meeting) people can start with de DD then 23:40 < Hyronymus> is that a realistic time scheme?~ 23:41 < jfs> "people"? who will be writing the DD?~ 23:41 < Zuu> hm,.. 23:41 <@Hellfire667> Reading it before next weekend should be possible.~ 23:41 < Hyronymus> that's next, jfs :)~ 23:41 < jfs> can i post my take on the DD now?~ 23:41 < Zuu> but discussing it is not realy realistic. 23:41 < pjaytycy> I'm not sure we can decide all of the things in 1 week 23:41 < pjaytycy> seeing we are working more than 5 months already on the FRD~ 23:42 < jfs> this will be a vote 23:42 < Hyronymus> that's why I want to put some turbo in~ 23:42 < jfs> people post their vote and their reason 23:42 < jfs> and once the time is over a decision is taken based on the votes 23:42 < jfs> no further discussion 23:42 < Hyronymus> jfs summarizes exactly what the intention is~ 23:43 < jfs> people can change their vote based on other persons reasoning during the time frame 23:43 < pjaytycy> It's better to have a solid discussion and a solid conclusion, before we start the DD. One week is too short to discuss everything thoroughly.~ 23:43 < jfs> ~ 23:43 < Hyronymus> but it would require a cut-off score for the voting! 23:43 < Hyronymus> ~ 23:43 < Hyronymus> well, if 1 week is too short then I have a 2nd radical idea 23:43 < Zuu> I agree with pjaytycy 23:43 < jfs> i suggest at least 67% flat for as the cutoff 23:44 < Hyronymus> next meeting is all about the FRD~ 23:44 < jfs> between 50% and 67% would make a vote at the next meeting 23:44 < jfs> sorry anything less than 67% will do that 23:44 < jfs> ~ 23:44 < Hyronymus> how about designating next meeting for FRD decision making?~ 23:45 < jfs> ok~ 23:45 < Zuu> Hyronymus: not that bad 23:45 * pjaytycy agrees 23:45 <@Hellfire667> I see no problem in that.~ 23:45 < Zuu> ~ 23:45 < Hyronymus> ok, neither do I :p~ 23:45 < Zuu> Better geting forward, than discussing ininportat things. :) ~ 23:45 < Hyronymus> but then already it would be good to have a cut-off score 23:45 < Hyronymus> 67% seems reasonable to me 23:46 < Hyronymus> if >67% measure passes, if <67 in-meeting vote~ 23:46 < pjaytycy> Like I said on the irc-meeting rules pages: such a 67% rule is useless because you rephrase the question to get the opposite result 23:46 < pjaytycy> ~ 23:46 < Zuu> how is the questions formulated? 23:46 < Hyronymus> and please note, negative things can pass too so it's fool-proof~ 23:46 < Zuu> pjaytycy stole my line.~ 23:47 < pjaytycy> sorry zuu :-( ~ 23:47 < Hyronymus> ok, we need a solution for that it seems~ 23:47 < jfs> it will not be as much questions as "select between these N alternatives" 23:47 < jfs> which are different interpretations of the FRD 23:47 < jfs> am i right?~ 23:47 < jfs> Hyronymus~ 23:47 < Hyronymus> thinking~ 23:48 < pjaytycy> you can use it once we have the DD in place: if you want to change the DD, we need 67% of the votes, but now we have nothing to compare to (except TTDPatch or OpenTTD or Simutrans) 23:48 < pjaytycy> ~ 23:48 < Hyronymus> as a matter of fact there might be cases like that,jfs~ 23:48 < Zuu> Sugestion: All questions will be based on changes in the FRD. "Would you like to drop X" or "add Q" 23:49 < Zuu> ~ 23:49 < Hyronymus> I have an idea 23:49 < jfs> or how about simply leaving the FRD as it is and let the DD writers decide on everything? 23:49 < jfs> and if you 23:49 < jfs> sorry~ 23:49 < pjaytycy> I don't know Zuu... It only took 1 person to suggest first/second class, now we need a 67% majority to discard it :-) 23:49 < pjaytycy> ~ 23:49 < Hyronymus> if we rate the alternatives on a 1-5 scale 23:50 < Zuu> pjaytycy: I agree 23:50 < Zuu> with you~ 23:50 < Hyronymus> all alternatives with an average rating of 4 or higher are accpeted 23:50 < Hyronymus> ~ 23:51 < Hyronymus> anyone?~ 23:51 < Zuu> not that bad, trought the numbers need a definition to be usable. 23:51 < jfs> would that be "rank" or "rate" ? 23:51 < Hyronymus> rank 23:51 < jfs> because often there will only be two alternatives 23:51 < jfs> could you then rank both of them 5? 23:51 < Zuu> So people use the same rank for the same quality.~ 23:51 < jfs> ~ 23:51 <@Hellfire667> Guys... I'm away for 15 minutes. I'll be back shortly! 23:51 -!- Hellfire667 is now known as Hellfire|Away 23:51 < Hyronymus> jfs, you could indeed. OK, we need asolution 23:52 < jfs> really, leave it to the DD writers. that will be easier. i think. ~ 23:52 < pjaytycy> Hyronymus, if we have 5 options for passenger traffic, we can't adopt "all" alternatives with a score of 4 or more (if you use jfs's sytem) 23:52 < pjaytycy> if you rank them, only 1 will have a score of 4 or more 23:52 < pjaytycy> ~ 23:53 < Hyronymus> ok, suggestion from jfs + personal addition 23:53 < pjaytycy> (maybe I'm sounding stupid now...) 23:53 < Hyronymus> let the DD writers decide. In the end the devs need to approve anyhow~ 23:54 < pjaytycy> so, we all voice our opinions in the forum polls, then the DD writers try to find the best thing in those discussions 23:54 < pjaytycy> ~ 23:54 < Zuu> With the guide of the rarte of the suggestions.?~ 23:54 < Hyronymus> yes~ 23:54 < jfs> until next meeting everyone should post their comments on every part of the FRD, and after next meeting the DD writers start writing, taking those comments into account. good?~ 23:55 < jfs> i think we agree on that then~ 23:55 < pjaytycy> I agree with jfs~ 23:55 < weni> I like the idea that someone decides what is good and what is bad :) 23:55 < Zuu> jfs: sounds inredible! 23:55 * Hyronymus agrees with jfs 23:55 < Zuu> I agree with jfs 23:56 < Hyronymus> no summary since Hellfire|Away is away 23:56 < Hyronymus> let me try it myself then 23:56 < Hyronymus> everyone reads the FRD and comments on the things he likes. Next meeting will be decision day for the FRD comments to finally reach a clean FRD 23:57 < Hyronymus> *likes = finds 23:57 * pjaytycy has 1 question 23:57 < Zuu> question I have.~ 23:57 < Hyronymus> pjaytycy was first~ 23:57 < pjaytycy> about the discussion 23:58 < pjaytycy> do we discuss on the talk-page on the wiki first? 23:58 < Hyronymus> what's the easiest?~ 23:58 < pjaytycy> and who creates the discussion threads on the tt-forums?~ 23:58 < jfs> i think phpBB is more practical for discussion that wiki~ 23:58 < Hyronymus> ok 23:58 < Zuu> I agree with jfs, as wiki is stupier than CVS. 23:59 < Zuu> ~ 23:59 < Hyronymus> the first one who has a discussion point creates a topic for it and stresses it should be ON TOPIC NOY` 23:59 < Hyronymus> ONLY~ 00:00 < Zuu> and for devs only? 00:00 < pjaytycy> I suggest to start the topic titles with a certain keyword to distinguish them 00:00 < pjaytycy> ~ 00:00 < Zuu> ~ 00:00 < jfs> for everyone imo~ 00:00 < Hyronymus> I don't care how mich discussion threads we get, as long as they're ON TOPIC. A keyword is indeed a good feature for the subject~ 00:00 < Hyronymus> I don't see a problem in allowing others to discuss either~ 00:00 < jfs> i suggest a [FRDF] tag on topics, "FRD Finalisation" ~ 00:01 < Hyronymus> ok, sounds ok to me~ 00:01 < pjaytycy> [RFD] = request for discussion 00:01 < pjaytycy> that's the usenet standard abreviation~ 00:01 < Hyronymus> we need Chris to strictly moderate OT replies btw~ 00:02 < Hyronymus> do we go with Usenet or with jfs?~ 00:03 < Zuu> jfs is more spefic, while pjaytycys is more well known (i think)~ 00:03 < Hyronymus> never heard or usenet so to say~ 00:03 < pjaytycy> it's not important~ (usenet) 00:03 < Zuu> me nither~ 00:03 < jfs> if we go for mine, a very simple search on the forum can bring up all relevant posts~ 00:03 < Hyronymus> ok, we go for jfs, decided by the chairman (sorry)~ 00:03 < Zuu> I vote for jfs 00:03 < jfs> without giving irrelevant posts on other eventual later discussion subjects~ 00:04 < Hyronymus> if you spot OT replies, ignore them plz~ 00:04 < pjaytycy> will be difficult for non-devellopers 00:04 < pjaytycy> ~ 00:04 < Hyronymus> ok, complete silence now plz 00:04 < Zuu> Shall we order another moderator? 00:05 < Hyronymus> here comes the Declaration of the DD. jfs:~ 00:05 < jfs> lol 00:05 < jfs> Zuu let's wait and see if it's realy required :) 00:05 < jfs> here comes a big paste 00:05 < Zuu> ok 00:05 < Hyronymus> sst~ 00:05 < jfs> i hope the lines aren't too long.... 00:05 < jfs> : 00:05 < jfs> The next milestone is a Design Document. 00:05 < jfs> The goal of the design document is to be a complete, not-too-specific description of the overall game experience. All developers will have to agree on the contents of the Design Document. 00:05 < jfs> The purpose of the DD is to be a general guide for the development of the game. It should be regarded as a "bible" or "constitution" for the development process. As such it can be consulted when there is a disagreement about something, and can hopefully provide ananswer. Nothing can override the DD, and it can only be modified if every developer on the project agrees on the modified document. 00:05 < pjaytycy> don't get yourself kicked 00:05 < jfs> It should be written in an easy-to-read language such that people interested in the project, be it potential players or developers, can get a good idea of what the game will be like. 00:05 < jfs> was anything cut off? 00:06 < Zuu> reading.. 00:06 < Hyronymus> sounds perfect to me~ 00:06 < pjaytycy> don't agree 100% with the "if EVERY develloper agrees", but it's very good otherwise 00:06 < jfs> the last word in last line shoud be "published."~ 00:07 * Zuu done 00:07 < Zuu> pjaytycy: agree with you 00:07 < Hyronymus> any ideas on what it should be?~ 00:07 < jfs> i have put up the text here: http://www.jiifurusu.dk/files/programming/TE/design-document-definition.txt 00:08 < jfs> ~ 00:08 < Hyronymus> nice 00:08 < Hyronymus> ~ 00:08 < Zuu> when meeting is done I suggest it is put on the wiki. 00:08 < Zuu> ~ 00:08 < jfs> my reason for the "every developer must agree" is that it's bad having a design document people can't agree on~ 00:09 < Hyronymus> I think jfs is right there 00:09 < pjaytycy> I meant the second time you used it, about modifying the DD 00:09 < Hyronymus> in the end we must all agree, even if we don't like everything~ 00:09 < pjaytycy> ~ 00:09 < jfs> of course comprimises must be made, but everyone must consciously agree even though they might not be fully satisfied~ 00:09 < Zuu> but with 100 developers it is difficult to modify it. 00:09 < Hyronymus> there are currently 16, Zuu~ 00:10 < Hyronymus> (counted weni along already ;)) 00:10 < pjaytycy> not only that, but if somebody is just too stubborn to set his own desires aside and "go with the team", he can block every progress~ 00:10 -!- Hellfire|Away is now known as Hellfire667 00:10 < jfs> wb Hellfire667~ 00:10 <@Hellfire667> I'm back. And I've read through all the stuff you've written :)~ 00:10 < Hyronymus> pjaytycy, in that case we dump the person ;)~ 00:10 <@Metalcore> i miss every meeting....i swear 00:10 <@Metalcore> stupid church 00:10 <@Metalcore> ...~ 00:10 < jfs> ok i see wee need a way such that one person can't just veto~ 00:11 < Zuu> then We must decide how to dump devs. 00:11 < Zuu> ~ 00:11 < Hyronymus> yes, but can't we discuss that on the forum too?~ 00:11 < pjaytycy> loll ~ 00:11 < Zuu> Hyronymus: think so 00:11 <@Hellfire667> How about plain common sense?~ 00:11 < Hyronymus> define that Hellfire667 ;). But I agree on that 00:11 < jfs> i suggest a "core developer" concept 00:12 < jfs> only core developers can veto~ 00:12 <@Hellfire667> If one dev sais "I think you're all wrong because 'blablabla', " then we should probably agree if 'blablabla' is correct / sound / whatever-you-want-to-call-it~ 00:12 < Hyronymus> I guess none of us will be that ignorant to waste a project because of personal favours~ 00:12 < Zuu> But we will probably need a rule that says that 67% must accept to drop a developerr or something. (but lets discuss that on the forum.) 00:12 < Zuu> ~ 00:12 < Hyronymus> jfs, your suggestion only moves the problem 00:12 < Hyronymus> core devs can be stuborn too~ 00:13 < pjaytycy> zuu, if I say I want to drop out, and I don't get enough votes, it means I have to stay :-( 00:13 < pjaytycy> ~ 00:13 < Hyronymus> anyhow, I sense a lovely forum discussion. who else senses that?~ 00:13 * Hellfire667 senses it too.~ 00:13 < Zuu> me too~ 00:13 < Hyronymus> do we have a volunteer to create a topic for that?~ 00:14 < jfs> ok so how about 100% agreement on the first version of the DD 00:14 < jfs> and 67% majority for on subsequent changes, 100% must vote in every case. 00:14 < jfs> ~ 00:14 < Hyronymus> jfs, can you create a topic about it with your suggestions in it?~ 00:14 < Hyronymus> sofar you had the most suggestions about it~ 00:14 < jfs> (we can afford to require 100% for on first draft becasue we still aren't that many developers) ~ 00:15 < Zuu> I can create the drop members topic. 00:15 < jfs> will do~ 00:15 < Hyronymus> is a drop members topic a good idea too?~ 00:15 < Hyronymus> it might scare people away~ 00:15 * Hellfire667 noted: jfs will open a dd topic. 00:15 * Hellfire667 ~ 00:15 < Zuu> didn't you suggest that? 00:16 < Hyronymus> no, I suggested a topic for how to get the DD accepted~ 00:16 < pjaytycy> I guess my 2 questions are answered now Hyronymus, zuu had a question too (22:59) ~ 00:16 < Zuu> Yes, but a flame war becuse we don't have rules for that will certanly not be good. 00:16 < Zuu> ~ 00:17 < Zuu> oh... gota remember it.. 00:17 < jfs> we do need a way to drop devs yes, so i am for a topic on that~ 00:17 < Hyronymus> brb, Hellfire667 takes over for a while 00:17 < Hyronymus> (sorry for the inconvenience) 00:18 <@Hellfire667> Dropping a team member is a hard decision. I presonally think that we should not define rules for that. IF a team member should be dismissed, we should decide then what to do.~ 00:18 * pjaytycy agrees with hellfire 00:18 < Zuu> Hellfire667: You get a point. 00:19 < jfs> agree~ 00:19 < Zuu> But can we do that without rules? 00:19 < pjaytycy> but you might have questions like "can we really drop a develloper because he writes Merikan instead of English ? " (see posts from Chris in the forum) 00:19 < Zuu> That says how many pople that have to agree. 00:19 < Zuu> ~ 00:20 < jfs> i'm afraid we will need a "ruling class" no matter what~ 00:20 <@Hellfire667> Pjaytycy: No. Definitely not. English vs. "Merkin" wars should be avoided. If people write American English, then it's their choice. If some Brittish person minds, he/she can always "correct" it.~ 00:20 <@Metalcore> Can we "correct" British English? -_-~ 00:21 <@Hellfire667> I also think that people need feedback to perform optimally. IF a team member is not doing what the team wants, then we should first discuss it with that member, and see if we can work it out, rather than dismissing them.~ 00:21 < weni> we can have general rule that aplies to everything like "project leader has last word"~ 00:21 < jfs> Metalcore, not if it has been decided the primary language is british english~ 00:22 < pjaytycy> ChrisCF = Transport Empire maintainer wrote: 00:22 < pjaytycy> "Merkin" = the (incorrect) US pronunciation of the word "American". As I said, we use real English, not bastardised American English, and that's final. BTW, I'm serious about revoking CVS access 00:22 <@Metalcore> have we decided that? I hope not.~ 00:22 <@Hellfire667> Actually, OT, Chris is wrong here. 00:22 < pjaytycy> See, ChrisCF has decided that to be a found reason to drop somebody 00:22 <@Metalcore> ....Bastardized~ 00:22 <@Metalcore> :P 00:22 <@Hellfire667> American English is the same English that was spoken in Brittain a few hundred years ago. 00:23 <+Steve-> Doesn't make it right 00:23 <@Hellfire667> Bet let's get on with the subject.~ 00:23 < Zuu> yes,~ 00:23 < pjaytycy> Just to show zuu is right we need "some" rules, but more about what is NOT a valid reason to drop somebody. 00:23 < pjaytycy> ~ 00:23 -!- Steve- [~Stephen@DarkPho.users.quakenet.org] has quit [Signed off] 00:24 <@Hellfire667> Style of writing is definitely not a valid reason.~ 00:24 <@Hellfire667> I'm thinking here... 00:24 <@Hellfire667> How about: 00:24 <@Hellfire667> - CVS wars 00:24 * Hyronymus is back 00:25 <@Hellfire667> - Consequent non-compliance with set coding standards. 00:25 <@Hellfire667> - Flames in project documents 00:25 <@Hellfire667> Any other suggestions?~ 00:25 < Hyronymus> yes 00:25 < Hyronymus> uncooperative work 00:25 < jfs> not meeting deadlines~ 00:26 < pjaytycy> no jfs 00:26 < pjaytycy> ~ 00:26 < jfs> + without a very good reason ~ ^^ 00:26 < Hyronymus> no feedback, only comment~ 00:27 < jfs> general inactivity~ 00:27 < Hyronymus> and what about this one: developing a similar game alone/with ohters~ 00:27 <@Hellfire667> So Hajo may never join us? ;)~ 00:27 < jfs> yes especially if that other game is/may become commercial 00:27 < jfs> ~ 00:27 < pjaytycy> Hyronymus, that's a difficult one 00:27 < pjaytycy> ~ 00:27 < Hyronymus> hajo quitted Simutrans~ 00:28 <@Metalcore> i say only if the game is commercial. 00:28 <@Hellfire667> Chochmah? (Zugspiel)~ 00:28 <@Metalcore> ~ 00:28 < Hyronymus> Metalcore has a point there~ 00:28 < jfs> if the game is being developed under an incompatible license~ 00:28 <@Metalcore> jfs said it first. 00:28 < Zuu> So you will ban me becuse I made an update to junctioneer recently? 00:28 < pjaytycy> well, Hyronymus, if you drop someone out of the project, and we use the GPL, none can prevent him from continuing his own "branch" ~ 00:29 < Hyronymus> that's a good one, jfs and you're right too, pjaytycy 00:29 < Hyronymus> ~ 00:29 < Hyronymus> can someone kick Zuu? :P` 00:29 <@Hellfire667> sure. 00:29 * pjaytycy kicks Hyronymus 00:29 <@Hellfire667> I'm an op in this channel :D 00:29 < Hyronymus> oooh, kicking the chairman isn't smart~ 00:29 * Zuu is crying. 00:29 -!- Hellfire667 was kicked from #tempire by Hellfire667 [You're the weakest link, bye!] 00:29 -!- Hellfire667 [~jeroen@195.240.128.92] has joined #tempire 00:29 -!- mode/#tempire [+o Hellfire667] by L 00:29 <@Hellfire667> see? 00:29 < Hyronymus> :D [/OT]~ 00:30 < jfs> ok anything else?~ 00:30 < Hyronymus> finish it, Hellfire667~ 00:30 -!- Hyronymus was kicked from #tempire by Hellfire667 [Ok.] 00:30 -!- Hyronymus [borgirc-nl@Hyronymus.users.quakenet.org] has joined #tempire 00:31 < pjaytycy> summary : every one reads FRD, creates topic with [FRDF] keyword to discuss new issues, everyone votes in those topics 00:31 < Hyronymus> what's the summary of this discussion about dump rules~ 00:31 * Hyronymus wants op powers too [/ot] 00:31 < pjaytycy> more summary: jfs creates a topic about DD changes, zuu creates a topic about dump rules~ :-) 00:31 <@Hellfire667> I think the thought rising from the discussion is that we really cannot drop people. 00:31 -!- mode/#tempire [+o Hyronymus] by Hellfire667 00:32 <@Hellfire667> ~ 00:32 * pjaytycy will be quiet now 00:32 <@Hyronymus> ok, the final word will be in the forum discussion~ 00:32 < jfs> where were we on the agenda?~ 00:33 <@Hyronymus> this was supposed to be FRD~ 00:33 < Zuu> FRD 00:33 <@Hyronymus> shall I carry on? 00:33 <@Hellfire667> please 00:33 <@Hyronymus> to the next topic~ 00:33 < Zuu> ok 00:33 <@Hyronymus> * General project evaluation 00:33 < Zuu> may I? 00:33 <@Metalcore> i own the channel. so there! :P~ 00:33 <@Hyronymus> might be a bit late now but~ 00:33 < jfs> yeah it's late :/ 23.33 where i am ~ 00:34 <@Hellfire667> Go ahead, zuu.~ 00:34 < Zuu> The idea behind this is that it has gone 10 months since Chris posted on sf.net that we are back on the rails since Rain left. However I get the feeling that the project is moving forward very slow. So my idea is to evaluate our work. 00:34 <@Hyronymus> Zuu, be our guest~ 00:34 <@Hyronymus> you got evaluation forms?~ 00:35 <@Hellfire667> Hyr, please. Zuu hasn't ended his monologue with a '~' ~ 00:35 <@Hyronymus> (sorry) 00:35 < Zuu> But after the discussion today I feal more promised about the progress of this project, so I won't make that much of it. 00:35 < Zuu> But I like to evulate the Featured Discusion, 00:36 < Zuu> anything more?~ 00:36 <@Hyronymus> meetings perhaps?~ 00:36 < Zuu> My list did contain: 00:36 < Zuu> # Ideas processing (FRD) 00:36 < Zuu> # Featured discussion 00:36 < Zuu> # Communications 00:36 < Zuu> # Documentation (that we have, should have created) 00:36 < Zuu> # Development plan 00:36 < Zuu> ~ == Hour change due to different timezone of logkeepers == [23:37] prototypes~ [23:37] you're satisfied woth the FRD now, Zuu? [23:37] so Feat Disc, meetings, and prototypes then. [23:37] Development plan sounds really nice... Tell me more about it.~ [23:37] yes, speak up~ [23:38] * jpl has quit IRC (Read error: Operation timed out) [23:38] prototypes are nice to get some discussion about how something could work, but then again not much use until we have a DD, i think. ~ [23:38] let Zuu discuss Dev. plan first~ [23:38] Hellfire667: I was wondering if there realy were any plan for this project, as it moved on realy slow (a half year to compleate the first part of FRD) [23:39] There are no plans yet.~ [23:39] Zuu, that's what the milestone discussion is all about (except that there is no milestone discussion) ~ [23:39] i think the DD would be the first part of a development plan, really. ~ [23:39] As Im just an hoby programmer and havent been tought any advanced development plans and such, I have been wondering if there is an underlying plan. [23:40] Previous tuesday, I had exam about Software Design [23:40] pjaytycy: thats why I said that I felt more confident after todays discussion.~ [23:40] so I know what the "theory" is, but I don't have any practical experience [23:40] ~ [23:40] in fact, the only "plan" so far has been "we want to make a game", which hasn't been much use really... ~ [23:41] pjaytycy: same here except that i had such exam like 2 years ago~ [23:41] isn't setting milestones a decent way to shape a development plan?~ [23:41] Here's what the plan behind the FRD was: [23:41] Hyronymus: prpbably [23:41] yes i suggest planning some milestones ahead to get a general plan ~ [23:41] First, we would write the FRD, which contains the things we're now going to put in the DD [23:42] ~ [23:42] Then, from the FRD, an Archtecture Document would be written, which contains UML diagrams and stuff. [23:42] Hellfire667 alone plz~ [23:42] And then, using the ADD, we'd start writing the code. [23:42] ~ [23:42] Obviously, now a DD has come in between, but that doesn't change much to the plan. It just adds an extra step. [23:43] ~ [23:43] I think I have heard something about that ages ogo.~ [23:43] that sounds like we can already set 5 milestones: [23:43] FRD finshing [23:43] DD [23:43] ADD [23:43] UML diagrams [23:43] Code [23:43] ~ [23:44] UML diagrams are part of the ADD ~ [23:44] Who shall add them to the wiki? [23:44] how about HCI design?~ [23:44] UML diagrams will apear in ADD too though (on a higher level), except if your ADD is not Atribute Driven Design [23:44] ok, 4 milestones then~ [23:44] hellfire said it too~ [23:44] who'll add it to the frontpage of our wiki?~ [23:44] ADD = Architecture Design Document~ [23:44] I'll do it. [23:44] ~ [23:44] not front page, but.. [23:45] In the template.~ [23:45] Templates:milestones (or something like that)~ [23:45] ok, the template (since the frontpage is sacred)~ [23:45] http://tt2.sourceforge.net/wiki/index.php/Milestones [23:45] current milestone should go in the templeate.~ [23:46] then you had featured discussion on your list, Zuu~ [23:46] wait a minute plz [23:46] ~ [23:46] Who is adding them to the wiki? [23:46] Hellfire667 is~ [23:46] ~ [23:46] you had something to add, pjaytycy?~ [23:47] maybe, but it's about getting from DD to ADD, but that might be better saved for next meeting~ [23:47] remember it yourself plz ;)~ [23:47] I certainly will [23:47] ~ [23:47] Ok, i'll continue then.. [23:47] plz~ [23:47] with FD. [23:48] It was origynaly (sry for bad spelling)my idea. [23:48] The idea was: many topics are advanced, and it takes time to get into them. [23:49] So if we could think about the sam thing when showering (exep Hyronymus who is singing in the shower). [23:50] * Hyronymus is able to sing, think, breathe and bath under the shower [23:50] We could have more intresting discusinons, than that I post a good idea, but you are thinking about anyting else, and cant comment by wondwrfull idea, becuse you are [23:50] thinking about your own. [23:51] Basicly that was the reason why I developed that Idea. [23:51] So now, [23:52] What do you think of it? do you think it have added anything, or have it made us discuss less? [23:52] it made us discuss more [23:52] but it may also caused some more difficulty [23:52] And also would it have been better if we would have used a forum? [23:52] ~ [23:53] and that's because of this: what do we do with the outcome of passed FD when writing the DD?~ [23:53] lots of questions zuu~ [23:53] ok. [23:53] best to begin with one. [23:53] pjaytycy: can you choose one? [23:54] * Zuu is lazy [23:54] did we discuss more or less now? [23:54] I think we discussed more. I we hadn't had the Featured Discussions, we would not have discussed those things at all.~ [23:54] * Hyronymus agrees [23:55] i can't comment on this, as i've first really been active in the project for the last 2 weeks and a bit more ~ [23:55] jfs thats understandable. [23:55] I think it really added to the crystalizing of certain ideas [23:55] ~ [23:55] I certainly thought about the game more, but I don't feel like there was much "discussion" [23:55] ~ [23:55] It got people to think. Hey... That's a lot! ;) ~ [23:56] I think sometimes it would have been good to have a paralell discussion too.~ [23:56] a paralel discussion?! [23:56] ~ [23:56] Maybe we do need a developers forum...~ [23:56] I think these meetings will eventually be the place where real dicussion come... I've noted a lot more discussion about unimportant things here than there was discussion about major features on the wiki.~ [23:57] more discussions than one. Or at least that people had added topics they want to discuss in the list. [23:57] Hellfire667: I agree. [23:57] ~ [23:57] I second Hellfire667's idea for a seperate forum [23:58] is that possible on the Sourceforge or wiki pages?~ [23:58] when the DD is finished there will be several independant topic groups that can be discussed. eg. UML and HCI discussion don't have to have anything to do with each other. as such they can be worked on by two completely independant groups which have each their featured discussion ~ [23:58] Not on the wiki pages, but we could install phpBB on our sourceforge webspace.~ [23:58] pjaytycy: do you mean that it is less unimporntant discussions now rather than before? [23:58] if you use a second forum, please make it guest-readable, so we don't have to worry about people complaining because of "not seeing development"~ [23:59] let's slow down a bit [23:59] Doesn't OTTD have a developers only forum on tt-forums? [23:59] ~ [23:59] I think we all agree on the usefulness of featured discussions [23:59] but I guess that discussion can be improved Session Time: Mon Jan 24 00:00:00 2005 [00:00] Hellfire667 suggest a forum for that, who agrees?~ [00:00] i disagree. [00:00] o/ ~ [00:00] * pjaytycy agrees if everybody can read it, but only we can post (like the news-section) [00:00] jfs: why? [00:00] so far there isn't much difference between developers and users, actually there's almost only developers on the project [00:00] ~ [00:01] then we should create that difference~ [00:01] may I say something? [00:01] ~ [00:01] no :p~ [00:01] yes :P~ [00:02] The reason for having discussions on the wiki was that nondevs from tt-forums should't post anoying OT stuff like, can we have a washing machine too? [00:02] ~ [00:03] yes, and that will always become a problem when decisions need to be made [00:03] But the Wiki is unfortunately not very suited for discussions, but more suited for posting information.~ [00:03] Hellfire667: I agree [00:03] jfs is right that someone who isn't involved, but following the project might have a usefull contribution to a discussion. But, in order to have our 100% developper agreement for the DD, it's important the devellopers agree and stay on the project. It might seem rude, but the players come in second place for this project in my opinion. ~ [00:04] jfs, if we create a difference bewteen users and devs, would you be in favour of a dev forum?~ [00:04] i don't see what you mean~ [00:04] Hyronymus, we should really have "admit" and "drop" rules for devs then.~ [00:05] and no dev want to implement functions just becuse 100 OT spammers sugestend a bullshit feature. [00:05] ~ [00:05] pjaytycy, admit seems the most desired ones now~ [00:05] jfs, you said you were against a dev forum since it's not clear who is a user or a dev [00:06] so I suggest we make that difference~ [00:06] no i said because there can't be any users at this stage of the project~ [00:06] you can't use a program that doesn't exist~ [00:06] Earlier it have been said that everyone who is on the dev list on sf.net is a developer. [00:06] ~ [00:06] so rather, there is *only* a dev forum~ [00:06] that seems so, jfs [00:07] but all we want is a protected area where OT is impossible! [00:07] that should be possible on the SF page~ [00:07] Without where can I get the screenshots/demo topics.~ [00:08] which is slow, but possible yes. [00:08] it would also bethe place for our FRDF discussions perhaps?~ [00:08] If possible at all, we should use a forum on tt-forums. They are much faster. [00:08] ~ [00:09] shall I contact Owen about the possibility of a usergroup?~ [00:09] I don't think owen would mind giving ous another channel.~ [00:09] I'll ask Owen to add a dev forum and a dev group, managed by one of us. If someone decides to join us, (s)he can [00:09] PM the group moderator to be added to the dev group. [00:09] ~ [00:09] ok, thx Hellfire667~ [00:09] I take you'll be the group mod?~ [00:10] Either Hellfire667 or Chris. [00:10] ~ [00:10] I could do that. But if someone else wants to take the lead, please say so. We could even let it be an "open" group, to which people can add themselfs.~ [00:11] we could start it "open" hellfire, as long as it works [00:11] But won't we lose the meaning then?~ [00:11] that would undermine the goal, Hellfire667~ [00:11] Ok. "Private" it is :)~ [00:11] OT: I have created the topic about the DD ~ [00:12] hehe, nice jfs [00:12] will we keep the FRDF dicussions in the new group?~ [00:12] yes~ [00:13] anyone else in favour of keeping them in the dev group?~ [00:13] * Hellfire667 is~ [00:13] acording to previous discusions we said that other should be able to add comments., but on the other hand we dont eant OT.~ [00:13] for~ [00:13] eant=want~ [00:13] but, I'm for.~ [00:13] I'll play the others, Zuu ;).And I agree too. Measure passed` [00:14] what els was on your list, Zuu?~ [00:14] so where were we then?~ [00:14] what do we do with the existing FD's? Copy them to the forum? [00:14] Were done with FD? [00:14] good point, pjaytycy [00:15] I suggest we copy them~ [00:15] I don't think so. [00:15] i suggest just quoting relevant parts~ [00:15] pjaytyce: no. Leave them on the wiki. Eventually, the results of the FD's will be added to the wiki anyway. [00:15] ~ [00:15] I think the result of the discussions on forum should be lift over to the wiki.~ [00:15] copying is duplicarting, not moving ;0~ [00:16] wiki should still be the index of all FDs.~ [00:16] ok copying from forum => wiki is fine with me [00:16] ~ [00:16] ok, more about FD?~ [00:16] Yes: [00:16] summary: we copy the relevant parts fromthe wiki to the dev group and post the result from dev group FD's on the wiki [00:16] ~ [00:16] Did anyone understand my addition about route and service finding?~ [00:17] Hellfire667: not 100%~ [00:17] Where did you add that Hellfire? [00:17] It was kinda technical...~ [00:17] same here but that might be my problem~ [00:17] In the Destinations discussion.~ [00:17] http://tt2.sourceforge.net/wiki/index.php/Talk:Featured_discussion_-_Destinations#Route_finding ~ [00:18] ok, that's another bad part of discussing on the wiki : it's not clear who wrote what [00:18] Good with wiki = threading.~ [00:18] Actually, using the history you can find that for each word on a page ;) ~ [00:18] let's not discuss good/bad about wiki~ [00:18] sorry~ [00:19] can you rewrite it in the dev group, Hellfire667~ [00:19] with the already added comment btw~ [00:19] Sure. I'll try to make it easier to understand too. (Using pictures and stuff ;) )~ [00:20] Hyronymus: I think that FD should stay in the wiki. [00:20] there was no comment on hellfire's piece if I see correctly [00:20] ~ [00:20] now I'm lost~ [00:20] * Zuu gives Hyronymus a white map == lots of forrest. [00:21] My addition was section 5, 5.1 and 5.2. [00:21] ~ [00:21] what are we doing with the FD now [00:21] does it stay on the wiki or not?~ [00:21] do we continue FD's ? ~ [00:21] I think it should stay. [00:21] Suggestion: Keep everything on the wiki, but future FD's will be on the forums.~ [00:21] pjaytycy: will be decided later. [00:21] agree with Hellfire667.~ [00:22] ok [00:22] I thought we went with Hellfire667's proposal before [00:22] Well then. What will be the next FD?~ [00:22] we do now for sure [00:22] uhm [00:22] remember the next meeting is only FRD~ [00:22] Hellfire667: wait with that. [00:22] ~ [00:22] Are we done with evaluating FD?~ [00:23] only if we all agree to not choose a new FD for now~ [00:23] * Hyronymus agrees [00:23] I can agree with that.~ [00:23] I agree. [00:23] I agree to choose no FD for now. [00:23] how formal~ [00:24] ok, communications in general, Zuu?~ [00:24] Ok shallk we evulate meeting, prototypes now, or shall we do in at another meeting to save time?~ [00:24] what say we?~ [00:24] * jfs sees this meeting running for loooong - 3 hours already ~ [00:24] I don't mind doing it now [00:24] Save time sounds nice.~ [00:24] sissies!!!~ [00:25] I would prefere to move on. [00:25] continue now. Is there anything -important- left on the agenda? [00:25] pff, afraid Mr Sandman skips your pillow?~ [00:25] AOB [00:25] I now realize you could interpret my point in both ways :-) ~ [00:26] is there any other business to discuss?~ [00:26] Hyronymus: AOB now? [00:26] we can wait 15 minutes :p~ [00:26] you frogot chose FD.. [00:26] we didn't, Zuu~ [00:26] we didn't summarize the current FD [00:26] Proto discusss.. [00:26] I'll be right back... Nature's calling. [00:27] pjaytycy does have a point~ [00:27] but Zuu, we just decided to not set a new FD ;)~ [00:27] * Zuu does same as Hellfire667 [00:27] weak blather community [00:28] we should introduce a "I need to pee"-rhime schema [00:28] ~ [00:28] * Zuu is back. [00:28] Zuu won the race [00:29] what AOB is?~ [00:29] No he didn't [00:29] Any other business, weni [00:29] ok :P~ [00:29] stuff that didn't fit in sofar~ [00:29] Hyronymus: what is your plan for the meeting now?~ [00:29] ok, Hellfire667: summary of the current FD [00:29] ~ [00:30] (then AOB) [00:30] WTF? Why me? I'll do it, but give me a few seconds to summarize. [00:30] you're the minute man [00:30] you should be summarizing *g*~ [00:30] I thought you meant the current FD. [00:30] Not the meeting discussion :) [00:30] Ok. [00:31] Owen will be asked to open a new forum for TEmpire dev's. Future FD's will be held in that forum. [00:31] For the next weeks, we do not choose a new topic for the FD, which means that the current topic will be the actual topic for a few extra weeks. [00:32] Zuu and Hellfire have weak bladders. [00:32] That's about it. ~ [00:32] "For the next weeks, we do not choose a new topic for the FD, which means that the current topic will be the actual topic for a few extra weeks." Did we agree on that? [00:32] everyone accept Hyronymus is afraid Mr. Sandman skips their pillow~ [00:33] it's a natural result, Zuu [00:33] unless you want no FD at all~ [00:33] Zuu: yes we did. Not for the last part, but that's just, as Hyr said, the natural result.~ [00:33] Next meeting is ONLY about FRD, remember!~ [00:33] Well thats more than I knew, but it sounds Ok to me. [00:33] ~ [00:34] is it safe to move to AOB now?~ [00:34] yes~ [00:34] no [00:34] (made to litle coffe) [00:34] no [00:34] prototypes were skipped to safe time, pjaytycy~ [00:34] I really would like to discuss the current FD [00:35] ok [00:35] (shortly) ~ [00:35] plz~ [00:35] SEctions 5 and 6 overlap a bit :) ~ [00:36] 5 and 6.2 perhaps [00:36] the rest is fairly unique IMO~ [00:36] pjaytycy: did you had anything?~ [00:36] I added section 6 more as "general" remarks, not geared to one of the sugestion above [00:37] well, that section was only "my" idea of what was important, and there was not much discussion about it, so I don't know if you all agree or all disagree~ [00:37] is it a good idea to merge them?~ [00:38] We'll see. Let's try to add more comments to what has been suggested already. Ok?~ [00:38] ok~ [00:38] I don't see how you would merge them? Hellfire's addition is about the implementation (using graph-theory etc), while mine is purely gameplay related. [00:38] anything more on the CURRENT FD?~ [00:38] wow, it's still going on. [00:38] er, ! [00:38] ...~ [00:39] beer for all, Metalcore :D~ [00:39] anything more on the CURRENT FD?~ [00:39] He's underage!~ [00:39] but I'm underage ;) [00:39] ~ [00:39] Metalcore: you young litltle boy should sleep now. [00:39] Zuu: Metalcore is Merkin ;) ~ [00:39] :D ~ [00:39] pssh, I'm 15. [00:39] :P [00:39] ~ [00:40] stupid tildes. [00:40] just ASSUME I'm not saying anything important [00:40] lets move on with meeting now.~ [00:40] because I'm sure I'm not. [00:40] last time or I pull the plug: AOB~ [00:40] no AOB from me~ [00:40] * Hellfire667 has no OB~ [00:40] What is the meaning of life? [00:40] I have [00:40] er, i mean, no business~ [00:40] Zuu~ [00:41] * Metalcore was kicked by Hellfire667 (During descent, head and ass and stuff.) [00:41] News letter. [00:41] * Metalcore has joined #tempire [00:41] * L sets mode: +o Metalcore [00:41] ~ [00:41] heh [00:41] Metalcore: please.. [00:41] kick message theif!~ [00:41] (the meaning of life is discovering how you can make yourself useful to others) [00:42] I think it's a great idea Zuu. Can you give more info about deadlines ? [00:42] ~ [00:42] ok, the newsletter~ [00:42] yeah, I'll shut up now. I can't believe I dared to think humor was allowed.~ [00:42] hmm, Is thare anything we want to add to next news lettet (begining of next month)?~ [00:43] the fact that we're proud to have our first milestone within reach?~ [00:43] Maybe I'm begining in the wrong end.~ [00:43] I wrote a small "sumary" of our current business in the thread you created [00:43] what's our first milestone?~ [00:43] Metalcore see the forum [00:43] ~ [00:44] but now things have obviously changed~ [00:44] how so, pjaytycy?~ [00:44] pjaytycy: cant see it.~ [00:44] [00:44] [00:44] Transport Empire is finally beyond the "collect ideas" stage. Several people have created some prototypes to check how a certain "idee" really turns out. In the mean time, the most basic issues (passenger destinations, scales, ...) are being discussed by the developpers on the wiki pages. No "real" decissions have been made yet. Every two weeks there is an IRC meeting to get some "real" discussion between developpers. [00:45] But, we are starting "real" decissions now as our next milestone. [00:45] Ah in the Feedback section.~ [00:45] That sounds nice for a first issue of the news letter.~ [00:45] I agree [00:45] but perhaps a small update to the current phase?~ [00:46] and please let it be reviewed by someone with a better feeling for english than myself :-) [00:46] ask ChrisCF [00:46] owen will read all before it is mailed.~ [00:46] he'll be happy to check for Merkin~ [00:47] was that all you had, Zuu?~ [00:47] So pjaytycy post his suggestion in the news letter theread in the TEmpire forum.~ [00:47] It's there [00:48] Hyronymus: Yes think so.~ [00:48] pjaytycy: cant see it.~ [00:48] (first reply) [00:48] ~ [00:48] pjaytycy, you have anuthing to add now~ [00:48] ahaa!~ [00:48] Who shall PM owen?~ [00:49] about what?~ [00:49] It was your idea zuu, so I guess you should PM our news :-) [00:49] ~ [00:49] what he should include in the global news letter.~ [00:49] * Grunt has joined #tempire [00:49] I can, if you give the final version to me.~ [00:49] I guess the submitter of the text does that! [00:49] *~ [00:50] OK, hellfire can put that on my todo list [00:50] ~ [00:50] done.~ [00:50] ok [00:50] no more AOB?~ [00:50] Now I'm done ~ [00:50] small thing [00:50] sure~ [00:51] we continuously said "2 people will be writing the DD". Who? [00:51] ~ [00:51] I thought we also said to determine that next meeting~ [00:51] i suggest saving that for next meeting~ [00:51] Good question~ [00:51] I agree with postponing that to the next meeting.~ [00:52] next meeting it is then...~ [00:52] I agree with Hellfire667.~ [00:52] but it's good to have that clear~ [00:52] well, the final topic has arrived [00:52] low and behold [00:52] * Setting new date + agenda, picking minutes man [00:52] But maybe we shall ask who is wilining to do that now~ [00:53] Zuu, the ones willing will make themselves known I guess~ [00:53] My girlfriend suggested to hold meetings on saturdays at 1900 UTC. [00:53] ~ [00:53] she has plans for sundays ;)?~ [00:53] i suggest that people stand for being DD writers during the time until next meeting, and we elect them during that~ [00:53] I would welcome earlier meetings.~ [00:53] wtf? Aren't you with your girlfrien on saturday evenings? [00:53] i'm for moving the meeting earlier~ [00:53] I'm for earlier meetings either [00:54] i can't come sunday mornings [00:54] a saturday is fine for me btw~ [00:54] church and such [00:54] church for me starts at....15:30 GMT? [00:54] maybe 14:30. [00:54] but still [00:54] quit church.~ (I'm going to do that.)~ [00:54] shall we plan the next meetin for 1900 or 18i00 utc then?~ [00:54] 1900 UTC I guess [00:55] a fair deal IMO~ [00:55] saturday or sunday? [00:55] saturday if people can~ [00:55] I can both.~ [00:55] i don't mind saturday~ [00:55] this one time, I guess I'll be available saturday (I'll tell my girlfriend I have to study) ~ [00:56] i'm indifferent. Althoug on a saturday, hving long meetings wil be less of a problem, because i can sleep longer on sundays [00:56] pjaytycy: :D [00:56] don't lie to your gf, pjaytycy [00:56] I won't be lying [00:56] technically, this can be relevant for a study ~ [00:56] I'll really have to study that day [00:56] just tell her we're entering an important phase of the project~ [00:57] nah, she is kind of alergic to everything related to train-games [00:57] :) [00:57] ok, next meeting in 2 weeks? [00:57] lol ~ [00:57] ok [00:57] - one day~ [00:57] ~ [00:57] (girls) [00:57] ok~ [00:57] ok.~ [00:57] * jfs yawns [00:58] agenda? [00:58] FRD [00:58] FRD [00:58] ~ [00:58] FRD [00:58] hang on [00:58] choose DD writers [00:58] date: 05022005 @ 1900 UTC [00:58] subject: FRD finalizing and choosing DD writers [00:58] please do your homework! [00:58] ` [00:59] ~ [00:59] Chairman? [00:59] I'm available [00:59] but maybe you get enough of me~ [00:59] Would anyone else like a turn as whipcracker? ~ [00:59] I wouldn't mind. [00:59] how about the postponing of minuteman selection? do we still want to do that?~ [00:59] to have Hyronymus.~ [01:00] no, we need to assign a minute man now :D~ [01:00] lol @ zuu :-) [01:00] stop fantasizing, pjaytycy [01:00] ` [01:00] ~ [01:01] But who are going to come, who can we select?~ [01:01] anyone willing to take minutes next meeting?~ [01:01] I really thought zuu was volunteering for next chairman ~ [01:01] I wasn't~ [01:01] Zuu, that's the trick called commitment` [01:01] if someone can't come nonetheless we can always assign a replacer~ [01:02] Who did it last time? [01:02] ~ [01:02] i won't be minute man~ [01:02] +me did [01:02] Zuu, could you do it then?~ [01:02] Idid before pjaytycy [01:02] Metalcore, can you be there 05022005 @ 1900 UTC [01:03] I can probably. (If you can live with my miss spelings.)~ [01:03] But, [01:03] 1900 UTC is either 1400 or 1500 here...I should be able to be [01:03] misspellings ;) [01:03] if you guys can live with me as whipcracker I ghuess they can Zuu~ [01:03] Unless you write the minutes in Swedish, we'll probably be able to read them ;) ~ [01:04] my way to do it is to do everything after the meeting = not take notes other than TODO.~ [01:04] ok, all set then? [01:04] Hellfire do you have a TODO list from this meeting?~ [01:04] I'll try to post a topic for the next meeting tomorrow [01:04] I think jfs can read them if they are in sweedish.~ [01:04] ~ [01:04] Umm... No. :$ ... But I'll post it on the forums tomorrow, ok?~ [01:04] ok [01:04] ok [01:05] ok [01:05] Meeting adjourned?~ [01:05] I have one TODO. [01:05] Hellfire667, can you also mention the rearranged topic at the start of your minutes? [01:05] All: [01:05] Important: read FRD [01:05] ~ [01:05] Hyr: Ok. ~ [01:05] sorry, rearranged agenda~ [01:06] I believe you understood it ;) [01:06] Thanx for all input [01:06] and jfs [01:06] Wheee! I can now go to sleep for 5 hours and 20 minutes... [01:06] next time you say you'll idle I'm gonna laugh, ok ;) [01:06] congrats hellfire [01:06] And I have no FD to create weee!~ [01:07] Meeting adjourned [01:07] yeahyeah [01:07] tnx. [01:07] I'm going to sleep now :D [01:07] i thought i was going to do other stuff tonight but it turned out otherwise [01:07] so excuse me ok? :) [01:07] for this one time, ok ;) [01:07] sleep well hellie [01:07] Goodnight all [01:07] bye [01:07] goodnight [01:07] I thought I was going to study this evening, but I couldn't resist the meeting :-)