Development progress

[fearless_wind]

Activity can be shown in Blog ot Twitter with description of new changes. Most users won't look to bitbucket to follow dev news, they will look to the blog.

[schlumpf]

That's why there is a twitter account. It already does exactly this job. Automatically.

[fearless_wind]

Yes, so source is not needed to watch activity.

[schlumpf]

It is.
An end user might not be interested, a developer might.

But well, I'll no longer discuss this with you.
The development and the process of it should be open.

[fearless_wind]

Twitter is for watching activity. Developers have access without any public repositories. I think you or other guys who are not in dev now can easily ask Steff to give an access to code.

[glararan]

Do it in public.

BIG +1!!!!

Twitter is for watching activity. Developers have access without any public repositories. I think you or other guys who are not in dev now can easily ask Steff to give an access to code.

This is same as Github has function with contributors... who isnt can fork stuff and use it with license and copyright.. others can study (horrible) code like me..

So only contributors can work on repo, why is it hidden? Reason? Steff and other guys dont want currently share code or what?

[iindigo]

Here's another vote for openness, if for nothing else simply to ensure that interested parties can make sure it runs on their particular setup (non-Windows platforms included). The wishes of past developers should really be taken into consideration, too.

[Crumpet]

It seems highly illogical that this is closed source with such a tiny team able to work on it. It doesn't need instructions on how to compile or anything else those who can contribute anything of use will be able to do this themselves. How on earth do you think this will progress if it's closed source?
Open up the source, open up the possibility of bug fixes, decent feature additions, code cleanup etc. etc.
I just don't understand. As schlumpf says, there is no reason to keep this private. Bah.

[Steff]

As it seams the most dont read the ful post I will no just repeat my answer.

Most all old developers work now again on it that are willing and still in the scene.
And again why its closed in the moment, we clean up. If this is done and there is a code base that is realy usefull to get open, it will.

And also again, there is a reason agains making something open souece. If you ask for help in the community for development my points are:

1. You have to give a good documentaions how to compile
2. A traker of jobs for the people.
3. You need to plan a roadmap to give people a hint what is most needed in the moment
4. You need to test the sended stuff (patches or forks) and give fast feedback. Nothing is more frustrating if you do some contributon to a codebase, send this in and noone repleys.

An I don´t see that there is someone in the moment with time for this.
Only releasing code on some open repository is not realy usefull to bring some benefit to a project. I don´t know how much frustrated post and direct privat messages I got in the last year form coders that even don´t get the QT version to compile.

If open source then the right way.

[Garthog]

So how is it going ?

On my part, I prefer having a code and no explanation on how to compile than no code at all. Plus I still don't understand the point on keeping it closed source while it's completely against its license.

For the tracker part, there is "Bugtracker" link on the top of this website. Isn't bugtracker/index.php what you mean by "tracking jobs" ?

I also believe testing should be possible for people using it ( all the modders out there waiting for new noggit release, people who know how to use the software, who know the common bug they have, and who can write useful bug report )

Just add "BETA" mention, and some little text to say how unstable noggit can be, and how unsafe it is for a serious project ( though I doubt it's worse than before =p ) if you don't want people to complain.

[Steff]

I still set my point. And release if it is eine.