Re: [Adonthell-general] [Fwd: Re: community ad]

[Kai Sterker]

On 26 Feb 2002 13:17:59 +0100 Alexandre Courbot wrote
> Good! Maybe it talks too much about ourselves and not enough about the
> project itself. It's goal should be to give an example of a "managing"
> open source game project.

True. While it is okay to learn a bit about the people involved, I think
the main point should be to interest people in doing their own OS
projects, or (better!) to come and help us ;).


> Right. We could put a demo screenshot of the new map engine and the new
> window system. We'd need some graphical material for that though ;)

You don't like the new houses!? ;)
 

>> -- in the beginning --

We should change "Ultima games" to Ultima 7, as the ones before weren't
as good as that one. Neither were 8 and 9.
 
>> -- hello world! --
> 
> Good thing to mention that the projects gained by merging.

Perhaps it might be good to explain the reasons for chosing the GPL.
Apart from the whole philosophy behind it, one of my reasons was that a 
task like Adonthell can't be done by a single person. And freely available 
code is a good thing to attract other people to join in. Trying to get
attention is the next logical step then.


>> -- more than just programming --
> 
> This is probably the most important point of the article (and the
> biggest advantage of Adonthell as well).

Right.

>> -- organisation --
> 
> This section is where we have to describe what's make Adonthell's
> organisation different from others (or from the
> standard-open-source-organisation), which it does well.

I think a point to mention here is that we try to organise and regulate as
little as possible, so developers can bring in their whole creativity and
experience. In turn that means of course that the individual developer
carries more responsibility.

I think that is a model quite different from others (neither Cathedral nor
Bazaar), but it seems to work pretty well for us.


>> -- working as a team --
> 
> Bad point here: the use of "we". This part should look more impersonnal
> IMO. Of course, mentionning about the meetings and the good time we
> spent together is mandatory and important for the article. But "we"
> sounds like advertising - remember that this article hasn't been written
> with the ideas of fame and advertisement in mind *ahem* ;) It should
> instead give a general idea on how the project has been driven so far.

Well, maybe it's just the headline that is a bit misleading here. Working
as a team is more an aspect of organisation.

A better headline might be "the social component" or something like
this, whereas "working as a team" could be the headline for the stuff I
mentioned under "organisation".

 
> One missing thing IMO: the move to Savannah. Someone who searchs
> Adonthell on sourceforge would wonder why nothing excepted a spam hasn't
> been posted to the list since ages.
> 
> Globally I like the article. Maybe we should wait to have something new
> to show before sending it though (maybe a 'tle demo of new stuffs) - so
> each time Adonthell appears somewhere on the net there is something new
> to check. Otherwise the audience would get bored to always see the same
> things.

Yep. It's a pretty good first draft :). I should perhaps go and add my
suggestions to the text. Then we can open the next round of discussion.

Kai