Open Source Realtime Strategy Game Engine
https://springrts.com/phpbb/
If you do that with all of our categories the list might get a bit long so maybe do some upper categories which have an entire page of their own. Might be more clearly arranged that way. I might create such a page later...
So you made "Source Development" out of "Development". I don't see the point in that. Or the other way round: What a source is developed or even better what other development is there that gave you the impression to split the more general term "Development" in something more specific? Well there is nothing like that imo and so it should just remain as "Development" just as the link in the navigation bar says...Source Development
Apart from the first one somehow sounding wrong you also destroyed the sense between the two topics by that. The first one is about actually developing the engine - i.e. grab your C++ compiler and dive into the source code. The 2nd category is about actually using the features the engine delivers. That's why the first one imo clearly should say "Engine Development" as that part simply is about the engine itself. The best term I came up with the 2nd one then was "Game Development". You shouldn't use "Mod" here as it's not about modding some existing content but really to create your own game with the engine (you of course also can mod things but Spring isn't just about TA anymore where you mod around OTA stuff). I also wouldn't put "Unit Development" in the topic as it's just one point of the game development and as said - it's about having a clear Engine <-> Game difference...Getting Started Development
[...]
Mod and Unit development
I don't know if that was on oversight or something but I see no reason for e.g. calling the section about s3o models "Units:Create Model" now (especially with an explicit one for 3dos right before). I guess you accidentally just put the current Wiki name of that topic there...# Units:CreateModel (--> Models s3o)
[...]
# Units:FBI (-->Unit definitions - FBI Files)
Why calling the part of installing it "Read me first"? I mean you go to the help section in order to ... well get help. So you then look which topic is about the point you have trouble with. In this case this is about installing it on Windows so I don't really see a reason not to call it that way. Not doing so will give people a "hard time" finding the right topic when having problems with installing and will result in superfluous clicks for those looking for something else but presuming some valuable info in that part which turns out to be an installation guide though. Your decision also doesn't really go in hand with Linux keeping its installation category clearly named that way...# Read Me First -->"Installing Spring (Windows)" (as this is the link from the Frontpage for "Windows")
Well I see no reason why it shouldn't be there - it's an optional thing anyway. Including it won't make the Wiki's primary purpose change and that's being about Spring. But why not allowing some guides for the games? I mean the games may actually present themselves (which often also include brief guides). Considering your argumentation those pages also should be removed. That's because they imo aren't just "showcased" but quite extensively described (game dynamics, tactics and so on)...I left out the Strategy guides on purpose, because I don't think they have a place in the "public face" of the Spring site (don't care if they're hidden somewhere). The reason is, the site is about the engine - I think it makes sense to also showcase which games are using it, but explaining those games is better left to the games one homepages, that's my opinion.
Should just remain Help for similar reasons I wrote for the Development section...FAQ - In use as "Help"
Well when it's about editing articles I wanted to start in the "game development" part sorting out which stuff there is outdated and so on. So I guess we won't start editing each other's commits...SeanHeron wrote:I'm fine with whichever way - I wanted to concentrate on other Wiki stuff now anyhow.
I want to go for revamping the top-level pages! Perhaps starting with Downloads or Games. And then I'd "work downwards" from there :D .
The idea is good but wouldn't you prefer just creating a topic for that here in the forum. Well I guess I'll just do one:SeanHeron wrote:If you do want to get started though, I'd suggest we discuss some more on the rough structure (and suggestions I made regarding that) at SiteMapThoughts (I've moved my comments to that page's Talk page, I'd suggest you reply there).
. So I've switched them all round, it's now the wished for name, followed by an arrow to a page we might use. Sorry for the hassle . Hope you're good with it like this!
. But if ever the event arose again, I'd know now what to do and how to test my CCS! Thanks jK!