Should the AGS community hire a paid full time coder?

[Crimson Wizard]

I see I might have gotten that wrong myself. I apologize for my reaction. Something gets into me lately.

I'd rather refrain from commenting this thread further.

[Radiant]

We have 3 ways, should I make poll?

I suggest that people should be able to pick multiple options in the poll; it's probable that a lot of people will like (e.g.) 1 and 2 but not 3.

[cat]

Honestly, the future of AGS is nothing that can (or should) be decided in a poll.

[Atavismus]

Honestly, the future of AGS is nothing that can (or should) be decided in a poll.

You are right, but it could be a start.
If we do nothing, I'm not sure about AGS progress.
CW is almost alone (check GIT contributions) and I guess that's also why he is "burnt" by AGS.
So if he leave...

We could need one defenser of each options able to expose pros and cons.
Then we could have something like a campaign and people could join one side or another.
So the vote (poll).

I guess it's a way to do, if someone have others ideas, I'll be glad to hear them.
I don't hold the truth nor a solution, I just try to make people think together to progress.

[Atavismus]

We have 3 ways, should I make poll?

I suggest that people should be able to pick multiple options in the poll; it's probable that a lot of people will like (e.g.) 1 and 2 but not 3.

You mean sort options by preference?

[Radiant]

You mean sort options by preference?

No, just checkboxes.

[Myinah]

Unless someone takes ownership of this project this will continue to go round and round in circles. You can't even get a consensus on doing a poll. Soon it will be lets do a poll to see if we should do a poll!

The problem we have is that there is no real leader, because CW is quite justifiably not wanting to take that role. So in this leaderless project everyone gets a say and no one is agreeing so it's becoming very circular. At some point someone has to say "We're doing a poll" instead of waiting for everyone to give their opinion about the bloody poll. Someone has to decide the poll results mean something instead of letting people say "Well I'm not sure we can let the future be decided by a few votes!" Because otherwise the poll will be a fruitless endeavour. There needs to be a leader, or leadership team who take the community into consideration but ultimately make the decision to poll members and then follow through on the results. Without that I think people will continue to disagree and we will be flip flopping here with no significant advancement. 

[Ali]

I remember about 10 years ago we elected a king of AGS. There was a flag and everything. Maybe it's time for us to seriously consider:

The AGS Elections?

We could run them at the same time as the AGS awards. That might empower a team of 3-4 enthusiasts to make decisions, without unfairly thrusting responsibility onto people like CW.

[Myinah]

Okay I think that's a good idea. Anyone can put themselves forward, make a case for why they should be part of the team etc in a FYC thread. Then we have a community wide vote and those elected are in charge of the AGS project. If CW wants to be on this team I feel he should be given an automatic membership because he's the one who has been doing all the work, but it takes the burden off of being sole leader.

The elected team would then either run a community wide poll on the direction AGS should go in and then enforce the results, execute the actions, or we empower them the to make the decision on the direction of the engine without a community vote.

(Now let's watch people debate this idea 100 times)

[Snarky]

I still think "making decisions" is meaningless unless there's someone to carry them out, and that most of the decisions to be taken are technical, requiring technical insight into the engine. (You don't hold public votes on which materials to use when building a bridge, particularly if you haven't even got either a builder or a supplier lined up.)

Leadership, therefore, will necessarily require hands-on involvement in the development. And if we had 3-4 people with the technical skills and the confidence of the AGS community who were prepared to devote as much time and effort as any of the more ambitious plans would require, there wouldn't be a problem in the first place.

I think the only meaningful outcome of a discussion such as this is people coming forward saying: "I want to make the next version of AGS. I will do this, which I think is doable because X, Y, Z, and here's what you can do to help/support me. Who's with me?"

Ali, your offer to help with a crowdfunding campaign is in the right spirit, but we need people to actually hack code. If Crimson Wizard is interested at all, I'd much rather hear his ideas and what he actually wants from us than whatever a poll says. (And I say this knowing that his preferred option is not the one I personally believe would be the best way forward: It doesn't matter, because a way is better than no way.)

Basically, I think we should all shut up unless we're going to be doing the work or our input is specifically requested by someone who will.

[Myinah]

We aren't even talking about these people coding the engine. Rather they run and enforce this poll people claim they want. So if the poll results say "We want a paid dev to redesign with a crowdfunding attempt." they go and execute that. If the poll results say "We want to keep the editor but find a company to improve the code" they go an execute that. Of course if there was a team of programmers willing to sort out AGS this conversation wouldn't be happening. This would be a team of people who care about the community and are willing to put time and energy into executing a democratic process and enforcing the outcome of said process.

For me personally it makes little difference what direction it takes. I'm a go with the flow person. I will learn new code if I have to and I want what's best for the community at large. I have a soft spot for AGS and I want the engine improved, but I don't mind how people go about it or if they go about it at all. It's this never ending debate I find a shame. Do it, don't do it, just get some kind of system in place where something actually happens! If it changes people will adjust, if they don't they have the older editor versions to play with.

At present we are looking into Godot for future projects because AGS has limitations that we keep coming up against. Would love to continue developing on the engine and see it grow, but I think this debate will continue to rage and stifle progress. That's my two cents anyway. Hopefully the community can reach a consensus and achieve something that pleases most.

[Atavismus]

I remember about 10 years ago we elected a king of AGS. There was a flag and everything. Maybe it's time for us to seriously consider:

The AGS Elections?

We could run them at the same time as the AGS awards. That might empower a team of 3-4 enthusiasts to make decisions, without unfairly thrusting responsibility onto people like CW.

It's interesting.

Still, it seems our future leader is shy, because no one claim the job lol

If I refer to "do-cracy", I could name these people:

- CW
- Gilbert (Dave and/or Janet)
- gurok
- monkey0506
- sonneveld

Come on guyz and gals, claim your crown!

[JanetC]

I think it'd be a great idea to hire someone to maintain AGS. The question for me is not *whether we* should do it or *how much* it would cost, but *who*? We at Wadjet Eye have offered several people money to update the engine in limited ways. I'm pleased to announce that Michael Rittenhouse (monkey_05_06) has signed a contract with us to do some small-ish paid updates that we desperately need as our "intern." I'm not sure whether he would be interested in more long-term and extensive updates. I'll have to ask him.

But as for professional contractors, the skill-set of "aging code compatible with 6 different platforms" is hard to find. I know that monkey_05_06 is only interested in PC and Linux and we really need someone to update the Mac and Android versions, which are basically non-functional at the moment.

[[delete}]

Supporting more platforms is certainly the right way for more developers as well as users. JanetC is right.

[Ali]

If I refer to "do-cracy", I could name these people:

- CW
- Gilbert (Dave and/or Janet)
- gurok
- monkey0506
- sonneveld

I really think it isn't helpful to volunteer on other people's behalf. That's just applying pressure to people who haven't asked for it and it's not going to make a project leader emerge from the chaos. If no one wants the job, no one want it.

The best we can do is give people the opportunity to volunteer their services, and see if we can make it work. On reflection, a successful Kickstarter would probably also bring in offers of help. But they'd be as varied and conflicting as the opinions in this thread, so it wouldn't lead anywhere without strong project leadership.

[Atavismus]

I really think it isn't helpful to volunteer on other people's behalf. That's just applying pressure to people who haven't asked for it and it's not going to make a project leader emerge from the chaos. If no one wants the job, no one want it.

It doesn't hurt.
Moreover, maybe they could want to lead but are not sure if they are legitimate.
If they are volunteered and notice that people are up for this, maybe they will start to think about it.

[Crimson Wizard]

No, this thread keeps making me mad.*

It doesn't hurt.

How can you even know that? You are not even in the list you made.

Moreover, maybe they could want to lead but are not sure if they are legitimate.

The legitimacy cannot be applied here, because there is no formal organization. The AGS source code is open, and anyone is allowed to do whatever they want with it. And no one can decide whether particular person is legitimate for doing that or not.
And lead whom exactly? Is there an established team already? Did they agree to be lead by elected leader? lol.

When I started working on AGS I did not ask people if I am legitimate, and did not ask permission from no one. The only thing I was interested in - what other people were planning, because I did not want to duplicate someones work by mistake. Then I found out who is already working on it, and suggested to join efforts.

The thing is that when we were discussing the development of AGS on the forums back 4 years ago, we were not interested if anyone's permissions or questions of legitimacy. We just wanted to try something out.

Another thing is; don't know about others, but I did not think of myself as a new "leader of AGS", that would be silly**. I only wanted to make an improved version.

The first time I asked permission was when we had actual new version. I asked if I can upload it to AGS server and announce it on website homepage. But that was when we had a real thing to show.


*It makes me feel an atmosphere of insanity. Maybe it is just me though...

**Community leaders can exist only when community is formally organized. The "program leaders" can exist only when "program" is restricted to be modified by others. There could be project leaders indeed, but at the same time, in case of open sourced software, there may be multitude of projects.

[Atavismus]

there is no formal organization.

Maybe that's a part of the problem.

And lead whom exactly? Is there an established team already?

Maybe that's a another part of the problem.

Moreover, "legitimate" was more technically/knowledge speaking.

in case of open sourced software, there may be multitude of projects.

Of course, but we are already not enough for one project...
Better concentrate all our efforts on one official project.

*It makes me feel an atmosphere of insanity. Maybe it is just me though...

Well, the atmosphere is sometimes weird indeed.
I wish we were all benevolent and constructive.
I sometimes wonder if some people just think there is no solution.
Imo, there is always a solution.
And we can find and build it all together.
We all love AGS.
Most of us want a modern AGS.
So let's do it.

[Crimson Wizard]

If you want to create a formal organization, then do not make polls, but create one. Then invite people in.
What you do is calling out for someone who should create organization for you.

EDIT: scrapped the rest of the post... that was becoming silly.

[Crimson Wizard]

I sometimes wonder if some people just think there is no solution.
Imo, there is always a solution.
And we can find and build it all together.

Alright, maybe I should answer on this.
The question is not whether there is a solution, but whether you personally ready to work on one. And when I say "work on", I mean, actually do a project; not necessarily as a coder, perhaps as an organizer, but actually do work, and not ask all the people around to vote in your polls, and not start discussion thread without stating clear questions and aims first ("making AGS better" is not a clear aim; neither is "should we pay someone for something we are not sure what yet").
Just an example of such work could be researching available options, their advantages and disadvantages, then making a report on your research; at least that would clarify things for you, if not anyone else here.

If you are not ready to make such work, then IM(H)O it is better to stop now, until you feel you can (if ever); because you will waste your time and accomplish nothing, but a long forum thread.
There could always be a solution, but it does not necessarily mean there is always someone who is ready to work on one, so-