growth agendas and OO

["Brandon J. Van Every" <vanevery at indiegamedesign dot com>]

Eric McDonald wrote:
>
> Of course this totally overlooks the segment of developers that
> have both the drive and the talent, but have made other career
> choices that they find more fulfilling, __who simply work on a
> project as a hobby in their meager free time.

Yes, I suppose that is true.  But the proof is in the pudding, right?
Like I said, show me the freeware projects with the AAA production
values.  I've never seen one, and I suspect they're few and far between
if they exist at all.  It matters naught if someone actually has the
talent to produce all the eye candy, if instead they apply their
hobbyist talents to AI code.  Priorities are priorities, time outlays
are time outlays.

> > Infrastructure should be built for people who are
> > *actually* using it, as they actually *need* it.
>
> Could it be?! He _finally_ gets it! Now he understands why there
> was no red carpet and royal fanfare waiting for him wrt the
> Windows build process. Amazing, he _finally_ gets it....

Do you understand why Xconq won't get any bigger without certain
infrastructural layouts?  This is quite late in technological history to
be doing C code.  But... some have a growth agenda, and others don't.

If you want to see a project with a real growth agenda, check out
http://nebuladevice.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/twiki/view/Nebula/WebHome
That's project management for growth.  Now admittedly, it's not a fair
comparision.  There's a company still driving a lot of Nebula's
development, even though they license the engine BSD style.  But the
point is, you get external investments in proportion to how easy you
make it for others to join your project and contribute to it.

I am willing to contribute to the OO-ification of Xconq, if you want to
pursue that agenda.  If you think that agenda is misguided, then it's
best to find out now.


Cheers,                     www.indiegamedesign.com
Brandon Van Every           Seattle, WA

Taking risk where others will not.