Allfd Posted February 18, 2018 Share Posted February 18, 2018 7 minutes ago, IK3I said: My point was that more devs isn't the solution, but rather a more robust review process. As it stands, if a maintainer is having issues IRL, then the review and merge process dies until they can resume their duties. This is the least robust form of QC and creates situations like this where we have multiweek stretches of zero relevant changes. Rewards should only ever be given out on a case by case basis and should never affect anything IC in a balance altering fashion. I'm simply suggesting that the admins and maintainers get together and assign trusted individuals to act in their stead should they encounter a situation IRL that would prevent them doing their duty for para. In total agreement, we can't dismiss the generous contributions of others as a server. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiredbum Posted April 20, 2018 Share Posted April 20, 2018 I absolutely agree with @Shadeykins on this. I've been doing the beyond tutorials for a few months now, and while I am be no means a pro I still want to learn. Having some sort of mentor thingy going for potential coders would be awesome. There's also the patreon munnies that can be used if the bugs are so bad that para could freelance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vissy Posted June 6, 2018 Share Posted June 6, 2018 It's been 47 days from the last reply. As someone who really likes the Paradise server, and, having a bit of coding experience, is shocked by the general soft crit state the codebase is in now, I would really want this topic to not go stale. On 2/18/2018 at 3:49 AM, IK3I said: So I think there is a deeper issue at work here in terms of the review process. As it stands, if dev is bottlenecked by a maintainer not having time to review code for an extended period of time, there should be failsafes in place such as authorized reviewers that can condense it into something they can meaningfully review or a temporary stand in that can act on their behalf for the time they take their leave. While this is at its core a hobby we all indulge in, having no means of production for more than a few days at a time should not be an acceptable state. I don't know what process works best, but as it stands, its been a week since anything was merged even with simple bugfixes and features on the table for significantly longer that that time. Active development is the lifeblood of SS13 and it would be best to ensure it can continue even when the normal team is having issues. I doubt I would make a more compelling argument of my own, so I'll just quote IK3I here. IMHO, they proposed a very good solution, which, if implemented, would help the aforementioned lifeblood gradually become un-stale, make the lifeblood flow better and purer and avoid causing unnecessary lifeblood vessel breaches. ...er, I totally wouldn't make a more compelling argument of my own. But I hope you get the idea of what I was trying to say. >w> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts