Meeting 2013 03 05

From PCGen Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Attending: Code SB - James; Docs 2nd - Eric, and myself Admin SB.

Summary: Discussion for next release on hold due to real life constraints. Andrew pushed for more talks about performance and meeting Data goals.


  • [18:45] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> Okay, let's get started.
  • [18:45] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> Welcome to our Non-Quorum Board of Director's Meeting on March 5th, 18:45 hours (PST)
  • [18:46] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> Attending currently we have Code SB - James; Docs 2nd - Eric, and myself Admin SB.
  • [18:46] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> Our Agenda tonight is:
  • [18:47] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> * Status for next Alpha or 6.x release
  • [18:47] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> * Open Forum / Other Business
  • [18:48] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> James - Would you do the honors and start us off tonight with the Status for our next release.
  • [18:49] <jamesd[Code_SB]> ok
  • [18:50] <jamesd[Code_SB]> We have a couple of code issues which it would be nice to sort out before producing 6.0.1RC1
  • [18:50] <jamesd[Code_SB]> I haven't been able to get much traction on those so haven't got a date planned for the releases currently
  • [18:51] <jamesd[Code_SB]> code otherwise has been quiet since the last meeting
  • [18:52] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> Thanks James
  • [18:52] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> Eric - how goes Docs for the next release?
  • [18:54] <[DOC_2nd]Maredud> Making some progress on DOC trackers, having closed or otherwise dispositioned 12 in the last week. I've been working the low hanging fruit initially but I'm beginning to look at the more complicated JIRA.
  • [18:55] <[DOC_2nd]Maredud> I have been merging the doc updates between the trunk and the branch so that when we're ready to go there is no doc work to handle. Otherwise there are no DOC trackers that would hold up a release.
  • [18:56] <[DOC_2nd]Maredud> Right this very minutes I'm updating the Default Monster Kit LST File Class to the current standard.
  • [18:56] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> awesome :)
  • [18:56] <[DOC_2nd]Maredud> Unless there are questions, thats all.
  • [18:57] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> Thanks Eric
  • [18:57] <[DOC_2nd]Maredud> No problem.
  • [18:58] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> Okay - Data - real life and my new schedule have been beating me up. It
  • [18:58] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> 's slow going for ARG
  • [18:58] <[DOC_2nd]Maredud> ARG is a beast!
  • [18:58] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> Indeed
  • [18:59] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> I'm of the mind to leave the types off and get the other stuff up and running
  • [18:59] <[DOC_2nd]Maredud> I agree with your suggestion that we leave the Race Builder until later. That could almost be its own set.
  • [18:59] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> *nods* yes
  • [18:59] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> Other than that I've been squashing bugs that pop up
  • [19:01] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> questions?
  • [19:02] <[DOC_2nd]Maredud> None from me.
  • [19:03] <jamesd[Code_SB]> Haven't looked into ARG, but getting the pre-listed ones out first sounds like a sensible approach
  • [19:03] <jamesd[Code_SB]> Perhaps a bit like the words of power are separate form the main ultimate magic
  • [19:03] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> It's required more editing of the core books, Bestiary I and II.
  • [19:03] <[DOC_2nd]Maredud> Right.
  • [19:03] <jamesd[Code_SB]> ah ok
  • [19:04] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> The Builder is definitely it's own beast to handle later when I'm of the mind to tackle it.
  • [19:04] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> Right now, too many issues on my plate that require my attention
  • [19:04] <jamesd[Code_SB]> The basic book does seem to be a frequent request currently
  • [19:05] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> Yeah, push that out first, then work on improvements
  • [19:05] <jamesd[Code_SB]> right
  • [19:05] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> Okay, open business -
  • [19:06] <[DOC_2nd]Maredud> I wouldn't worry over much with integrating ARG with B1 and B2. We can handle that as part of the cleanup once the main races are out.
  • [19:06] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> I started a discussion on _exp and would like more code input on pushing forward. It's about performance. Tom's concern
  • [19:06] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> (I already handled the B1 and B2)
  • [19:06] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> ;)
  • [19:06] <[DOC_2nd]Maredud> (The Ifrit comes to mind.)
  • [19:06] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> Tom's concern about the multiple processing is something that comes to mind
  • [19:07] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> (Ifrit is a bug to be fixed)
  • [19:08] <jamesd[Code_SB]> ok, just as background in general I am not a fan of coding for performance - maintainability is much more important
  • [19:08] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> Anyways, we need to take a serious look at the Data Design and Code Design and making sure we're heading in the correct direction, since the problem is only going worsen.
  • [19:08] <jamesd[Code_SB]> However we need to ensure that the product continues to run at an acceptable pace and we don;t lose the gains we have made in the new core and UI
  • [19:08] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> Agreed
  • [19:09] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> I'm looking for works properly, not losing function and having a good performance
  • [19:09] <jamesd[Code_SB]> Sounds like a sensible approach
  • [19:10] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> Anyways, that's a discussion I'd like to have sooner than later to make any necessary changes in 6.2+
  • [19:10] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> This may be the catalyst for PRE separation to REQ
  • [19:10] <jamesd[Code_SB]> What we have to do is examine what the expensive parts are doing and find out if there is a less expensive way of achieving the same result
  • [19:10] <jamesd[Code_SB]> With the current availability of the code team we might not get too far in that discussion right now though
  • [19:11] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> Understood. Either better management of the resources by re-coding it, or wasn't the CDOM supposed to be smarter and handle the PUSH vs. PULL
  • [19:12] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> If the PRExxx stop doing PULL requests and instead are smarter for the PUSH that would save us tons in processing cyucles
  • [19:12] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> That's a discussion best held on _exp though.
  • [19:12] <jamesd[Code_SB]> Well, I'm not sure that can work in theory
  • [19:12] <jamesd[Code_SB]> agreed
  • [19:13] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> That's my outstanding discussion. Any other business?
  • [19:13] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> (OPEN FORUM for the Lurkers if they wish to jump in)
  • [19:13] <jamesd[Code_SB]> none here
  • [19:13] <[DOC_2nd]Maredud> None here.
  • [19:13] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> Oh, a request from me. I'm going to be working every Tuesday.
  • [19:14] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> Is it possible we push this meeting to Wednesdays?
  • [19:14] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> Otherwise, it's gonna be hit/miss from this point forward
  • [19:14] <[DOC_2nd]Maredud> I can make Wednesday as often as I can make Tuesdays.
  • [19:15] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> :)
  • [19:18] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> James?
  • [19:22] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> I presume the silence means no other business
  • [19:23] <@[Admin_SB]Drew> *Bangs gavel* Meeting closed. Thanks for coming everyone.
Retrieved from "http://159.203.101.162/w/index.php?title=Meeting_2013_03_05&oldid=3337"