View Single Post
Old 20-06-16, 16:10   #1924
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 134

Originally Posted by Gh0stBlade View Post
I personally feel that bad decisions have been made. We're a team, were supposed to work on this together to achieve the same goal. I get the impression that some programmers on the team did not like changes made to the master repo which caused a very silent split of the team.
When a people feel that something is not right, there always is a temptation to step aside without a fight. And only a mature person can cope with that despite the cost. Unfortunately for the open source projects they are just a hobby, so there is little reason to make one's life more difficult than it used to be. It isn't fun.

Originally Posted by Gh0stBlade View Post
I remember the good old days when development started to pick up because we had so many people working on the project at once.
Yes, the cooperation can do wonders to what a society may achieve. But that doesn't come without some sacrifice.

Originally Posted by Gh0stBlade View Post
(TeslaRus/OpenTomb) is based off an old (opentomb/OpenTomb) commit before the code refactoring began. With new features and bug fixes.
Not exactly. That repository was based on a different code base from the beginning. It was a personal experimental branch, while the opentomb repository has the stable code with bug fixes. TeslaRus did commits to both at the time.

Originally Posted by stohrendorf View Post
Personally, I'd really like to see people helping TeslaRus, because the current state of the refactored "OpenTomb" repository feels like a failed experiment to me. Rename the master branch of the "official" repository to have a backup, grab TeslaRus' code, force-push it to the master, and get TeslaRus back on track. Let the Phoenix raise from the ashes, so to speak. I have my own little pet fork to play with
I wish it would be that simple. But do TeslaRus wants to work on such branch? And would others resume contributing to it in that case? That's the question.

Last edited by vvsgh; 20-06-16 at 16:12.
vvsgh is offline   Reply With Quote