sm-sorcery AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Discussion of Sorcery related topics
List archive
Re: [SM-Grimoire]Re: [SM-Sorcery]RFC: Somewhat major change in sorcery
- From: "Ryan Abrams" <rabrams AT sourcemage.org>
- To: "Nick Jennings" <nkj AT namodn.com>
- Cc: <sm-sorcery AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: Re: [SM-Grimoire]Re: [SM-Sorcery]RFC: Somewhat major change in sorcery
- Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2002 15:45:31 -0500
(Removing SM-Grimoire so we stop polluting that list.)
Yes, I have known for a month when 0.8.1 was to be released. I have also
known when the freeze is meant to happen. What you have essentially said
(and correct me if I'm wrong) is that you will accept the patch for 0.8.1 by
4pm today, but won't accept it after that.
Your criteria were, and I quote, "But, if you can get all of this done for
0.8.1 (today) and you can address the concerns I brought up in the other
message (Update occurance, branch viewing, etc.) as well as make sure that
the version of the program installed is kept track of still (and not just
'stable' or 'devel' as you originally proposed), then we can stick it in."
and set the time for 0.8.1 as 4pm PST. This is not enough time, and a bunch
of new rather large, somewhat unrelated criteria. In other words, its a
great (possibly subconcious) way to shaft an idea without having to say no.
Which is bullshit.
My response remains as it has been since then.. No. It won't be ready by 4pm
PST today, so we will have to stick it in after the 0.8.1 release. Your
response to that is that you don't want to keep changing things for the
users.
This is ridiculous Nick. 0.8.x has always been about adding new features and
making major changes before we freeze it at 0.9 and bug hunt. Yet when I go
to make a major change to allow new spell features, you start talking about
not wanting to make changes for the users in 0.8 etc... and then turn around
and email everyone else about how 0.8 is /beta/ and things are expected to
break and keep breaking until the freeze, etc.
Make up your mind.
The way I see it, there are three options here:
1) Freeze Now. Dont let anything else in, as we dont want to keep changing
things for the user.
2) Let in new features. We want to expand sorcery until we freeze on the
29th, then start resolving any existng and newly created bugs.
3) Only let in we thought of a month ago. We want to expand sorcery, but
only by adding features that we already thought of a month ago. New features
thought of and implemented after the month ago unannounced idea-freeze don't
count.
I honestly don't care. You are sorcery team lead because you have proven
yourself worthy of the role. If you don't want it in Sorcery, Take a stand.
Say so. Fine. Thats your decision to make, and I will back you up even if I
disagree with it. If you /do/ want it in sorcery, or are willing to give it
a shot, then just tell me to implement it before the freeze, and if I miss
the date, I miss the date and it's my own fault. But this arbitrary, less
than 10 hours notice, pre-freeze stuff doesn't make sense, and it's
seriously pissing me off.
I don't know. Maybe I am being unreasonable by expecting more than a day and
a half to implement and test a major feature/change even though the freeze
isnt for two more weeks. Or maybe I am being unreasonable about something
else that I can't see. I dont know. I am too close to this to see any of it
clearly.
In any case, It's nothing personal.. you are just trying to do your job as
sorcery team lead, which is great. I just don't understand your methods, and
you don't seem to be able to explain them in a way that I can comprehend. I
don't know if that's my fault or yours.
If I am out of line, would some third party person please let me know? Cause
I don't get it.
-Ryan
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nick Jennings" <nkj AT namodn.com>
To: "Ryan Abrams" <rabrams AT sourcemage.org>
Cc: <sm-sorcery AT lists.ibiblio.org>; <sm-grimoire AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 3:21 PM
Subject: [SM-Grimoire]Re: [SM-Sorcery]RFC: Somewhat major change in sorcery
> Oh come one, US Supreme Court?
>
> I'm trying to maintain some form of consistency. You've known for
> at least a month when 0.8.1 was to be released, so don't get on
> me like I'm giving you some last minute information.
>
> I'm in the middle of trying to get the CVS grimoire updated into perforce
> (this seems to be an angoing problem), hopefully it's done in time
> for the release (it has the updated sorcery-* spells).
>
> On Tue, Sep 10, 2002 at 02:18:34PM -0500, Ryan Abrams wrote:
> > Nick,
> >
> > I dont care what time 4pm is GMT. The fact is that this afternoon you
told
> > me that you need a patch by 4pm to be included, and you implied that you
> > arent as interested in including it after this version (even though the
> > freeze isnt until the 29th) because you are thinking of the end users.
This
> > is like when the US Supreme Court said bush would be president unless an
> > appeal was filed by 10pm, and released the ruling at 10:30.
> >
> > I will get the patch done as quickly as I can, but I make no promises. I
am
> > not saying hold up release. I am saying that it may have to go in
0.8.1.2 or
> > 0.8.2 or something.
> >
> > The cronjobs are set to midnight EST. They can also be run manually at
/any/
> > time. Just ask.
> >
> > -Ryan
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Nick Jennings" <nkj AT namodn.com>
> > To: "Ryan Abrams" <rabrams AT sourcemage.org>
> > Cc: <sm-sorcery AT lists.ibiblio.org>; <sm-grimoire AT lists.ibiblio.org>
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 1:53 PM
> > Subject: Re: [SM-Sorcery]RFC: Somewhat major change in sorcery
> >
> >
> > > On Tue, Sep 10, 2002 at 01:10:59PM -0500, Ryan Abrams wrote:
> > > > Basically, I will do what I can. But don't set a deadline mid day
for
> > 4pm
> > > > that same day, when I am at work and can't legitimately work on
meeting
> > it
> > > > until after it is already past.
> > >
> > > Ryan, 4pm Pacific Time, is 11pm GMT.
> > >
> > > I'm going to make the release before 12pm GMT.
> > >
> > > When are the con jobs on download.sourcemage.org set to go to tarball
> > > the cvs 'stable' and 'devel'?
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > SM-Sorcery mailing list
> > > SM-Sorcery AT lists.ibiblio.org
> > > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-sorcery
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > SM-Sorcery mailing list
> > SM-Sorcery AT lists.ibiblio.org
> > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-sorcery
> >
> _______________________________________________
> SM-Grimoire mailing list
> SM-Grimoire AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-grimoire
>
-
[SM-Sorcery]RFC: Somewhat major change in sorcery,
Ryan Abrams, 09/09/2002
-
Re: [SM-Sorcery]RFC: Somewhat major change in sorcery,
Sergey A Lipnevich, 09/10/2002
-
Re: [SM-Sorcery]RFC: Somewhat major change in sorcery,
Ryan Abrams, 09/10/2002
- Re: [SM-Sorcery]RFC: Somewhat major change in sorcery, Sergey A Lipnevich, 09/10/2002
- Re: [SM-Grimoire]Re: [SM-Sorcery]RFC: Somewhat major change in sorcery, Jon Svendsen, 09/10/2002
-
Re: [SM-Sorcery]RFC: Somewhat major change in sorcery,
Ryan Abrams, 09/10/2002
-
Re: [SM-Sorcery]RFC: Somewhat major change in sorcery,
Nick Jennings, 09/10/2002
-
Re: [SM-Sorcery]RFC: Somewhat major change in sorcery,
Ryan Abrams, 09/10/2002
-
Re: [SM-Sorcery]RFC: Somewhat major change in sorcery,
Nick Jennings, 09/10/2002
-
Re: [SM-Sorcery]RFC: Somewhat major change in sorcery,
Ryan Abrams, 09/10/2002
-
Re: [SM-Sorcery]RFC: Somewhat major change in sorcery,
Nick Jennings, 09/10/2002
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire]Re: [SM-Sorcery]RFC: Somewhat major change in sorcery,
Ryan Abrams, 09/10/2002
- Re: [SM-Grimoire]Re: [SM-Sorcery]RFC: Somewhat major change in sorcery, Nick Jennings, 09/10/2002
- Re: [SM-Grimoire]Re: [SM-Sorcery]RFC: Somewhat major change in sorcery, Ryan Abrams, 09/10/2002
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire]Re: [SM-Sorcery]RFC: Somewhat major change in sorcery,
Ryan Abrams, 09/10/2002
-
Re: [SM-Sorcery]RFC: Somewhat major change in sorcery,
Nick Jennings, 09/10/2002
-
Re: [SM-Sorcery]RFC: Somewhat major change in sorcery,
Ryan Abrams, 09/10/2002
-
Re: [SM-Sorcery]RFC: Somewhat major change in sorcery,
Nick Jennings, 09/10/2002
-
Re: [SM-Sorcery]RFC: Somewhat major change in sorcery,
Ryan Abrams, 09/10/2002
-
Re: [SM-Sorcery]RFC: Somewhat major change in sorcery,
Sergey A Lipnevich, 09/10/2002
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
-
Re: [SM-Sorcery]RFC: Somewhat major change in sorcery,
Nathan Doss, 09/10/2002
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire]Re: [SM-Sorcery]RFC: Somewhat major change in sorcery,
Ryan Abrams, 09/10/2002
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire]Re: [SM-Sorcery]RFC: Somewhat major change in sorcery,
Nick Jennings, 09/10/2002
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire]Re: [SM-Sorcery]RFC: Somewhat major change in sorcery,
Ryan Abrams, 09/10/2002
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire]Re: [SM-Sorcery]RFC: Somewhat major change in sorcery,
Nick Jennings, 09/10/2002
- Re: [SM-Grimoire]Re: [SM-Sorcery]RFC: Somewhat major change in sorcery, Ryan Abrams, 09/10/2002
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire]Re: [SM-Sorcery]RFC: Somewhat major change in sorcery,
Aaron Brice, 09/11/2002
- Re: [SM-Grimoire]Re: [SM-Sorcery]RFC: Somewhat major change in sorcery, Dufflebunk, 09/12/2002
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire]Re: [SM-Sorcery]RFC: Somewhat major change in sorcery,
Nick Jennings, 09/10/2002
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire]Re: [SM-Sorcery]RFC: Somewhat major change in sorcery,
Ryan Abrams, 09/10/2002
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire]Re: [SM-Sorcery]RFC: Somewhat major change in sorcery,
Nick Jennings, 09/10/2002
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire]Re: [SM-Sorcery]RFC: Somewhat major change in sorcery,
Ryan Abrams, 09/10/2002
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.