SpringLobby - please implement !join

[danil_kalina]

19:00 CET suits us perfect, thanks

[danil_kalina]

we are here, where is the meeting ?)

[Cheesecan]

Yes where is it..

[a1983]

I hope to 22:00 CET all will be here )
And what subject will be discussed? I think new lobby protocol changes?

[Cheesecan]

Could we agree on a channel? #lobbydev ?

[koshi]

A more prominent heads up of more than a couple of hours would've been a good idea...

[danil_kalina]

didn't get your message

[koshi]

huh? I didn't send no message to you and how would you know you didn't get it anyhow?

[danil_kalina]

A more prominent heads up of more than a couple of hours would've been a good idea...

did not understand what have you written here, sorry

[koshi]

Meaning next time you try to set up a meeting, do it in its own thread and not only a couple hours before the time you eventually target/agree on.

[Cheesecan]

I'll go ahead and conclude that the meeting didn't happen (or else I wasn't invited).

Schedule a new meeting for next week, time, place and topics of discussion. My suggestion below.

Time: 21:30 CET 15th Feb
Channel: #lobbydev.
Topic: One topic (obvious) could be !join and other custom commands like it.

[cleanrock]

Where will that #lobbydev channel be ?
Also, i am a bit skeptical that magic will happen by just gathering a bunch of lobby devs in a chat but perhaps its a good start.
I think a lot can be discussed on this forum first (but not this thread), e.g. on the "!join"-topic my opinion is that a lobby should never move a user, lobby should only inform a user of possible "better" games to join.

[gajop]

Where will that #lobbydev channel be ?

You are probably not a lobbydev if you can't answer that question :)
That meeting is really meant for people who are developing lobbies, as a way to kickstart communication.

[cleanrock]

I suppose its a spring lobby channel then. (I am a lobby dev)

[very_bad_soldier]

Would it make sense for you guys to collaborate in some way? I mean we have >5 lobby devs now and also >5 lobbies. I am not sure if we need so many different lobbies in such a small community (its like we have more lobbies than actual games running).
Would imo be awesome if you could work together to make just one (or 2) lobby but that one would be really mature and well maintained. This community lacks teamwork, maybe you guys want to do it better. Just my two cents...

[hoijui]

yeah sure, but that is not realistic.
best thing is, to have lots of lobbies, and support all of them as well as possible, and over time, some of them will vanish anyway. this is open source, it does not work like ... if you stop one lobby, the devs go to an other one. and it is good this way, cause if we would somehow artificially force there to be less lobbies, we would just have that, less lobbies, and the remianig ones would rather be worse, surely not better then the two best ones of the many lobbies scenario.

[koshi]

I've tried to get collaboration going when Auswaschbar wanted to add a basic client to the engine, but he wanted to rewrite everything (which ended up very incomplete..) rather than work with us to create a foundation library from existing SL code. Same thing with the first incarnation of qtlobby, only they at least copied some of our code iirc. I don't quite remember what I worked out with the guy launching the qtlobby resurrection, but before we got anything done lobby wise he vanished again. I only got wind of notalobby with their first release and they don't seem to want to open their source. And that's just the c++ projects I'm aware of...
Anywho, we've since started to strip all base logic code from SL into a lib that only depends on stuff the engine already depends on. If nothing else we just might get a proper client to replace the stunted stuff in engine and something which will allow me to further SASI development w/o the baggage of mixed wx/qt code.

[very_bad_soldier]

best thing is, to have lots of lobbies, and support all of them as well as possible, and over time, some of them will vanish anyway. this is open source, it does not work like ...

Sorry, but I do not agree here at all. The last couple of years proved that it does not work for us. Each vanished project is wasted effort and sad for us. We have a bunch of lobbies, mods, widgets, etc. Even multiple lobby servers. Most of them run and maintained by single persons. Sorry to say, but in my opinion some of those one-man-projects are not in a good shape. For example we dont need 20 mods, we just need 3-4 proper ones.
I do not speak about forcing anything on anyone but maybe someone wants to ask himself if he really wants to start another one of those one-man-projects instead of joining an existing team to make it stronger.
Well, as I said, no offense, just my opinion. I dont really expect to be able to change someones opinion here, so nvm. Sorry for the derail.

[danil_kalina]

There are Games: Zero-K, Balanced Annihilation, Tech Annihilation, Evolution RTS, NOTA, ... The Cursed, Spring Tanks, Jorney war,.... I am sorry if I didn't mention some others.

They are different games. Who want to help another project if he doesn't like to play it ? Players will decide which they want to play more.

[dansan]

Anywho, we've since started to strip all base logic code from SL into a lib that only depends on stuff the engine already depends on. If nothing else we just might get a proper client to replace the stunted stuff in engine and something which will allow me to further SASI development w/o the baggage of mixed wx/qt code.

*Claps* for libspringlobby - common code for spring lobbies!