Global Development Team? - Page 8

Inverness · #**106** 08-21-2009, 06:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hiro

well then why don't we just give all well known and noticeable developers a GDT tag who want one so that they can all help out and contribute? if there isn't going to be any type of leadership, then any developer should be able to join

And what kind of logic made you come to that conclusion? You also haven't answered my question: why does the team need a leader? The team does not need a designated leader to have leadership.

Scary_Sock · #**107** 08-21-2009, 08:02 AM

I still find it hard to believe how the GDT would fail miserably. I think it would start off with a good and fresh start.

Hiro · #**108** 08-21-2009, 11:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inverness

And what kind of logic made you come to that conclusion? You also haven't answered my question: why does the team need a leader? The team does not need a designated leader to have leadership.

having no leader means there won't be any clear direction for the team to take under the guidance of one person: in a counsel setting, things will be split up based upon either voting or volunteering. if it's going to be done that way, it will be most productive and worth while with a larger group of developers who wish to be apart of the group, because the more votes the more opinions and brainstorming power, and the more work will get volunteered to people who want to do the job - there shouldn't have to be any serious application process, only a small one so that the team knows who wants to join. this is especially true if the team isn't only for development purposes

also i never meant to answer why you needed a leader. i don't think you need one, i just point out that if the team is going leaderless, then the more the merrier, and the more the mightier

Inverness · #**109** 08-21-2009, 03:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hiro

having no leader means there won't be any clear direction for the team to take under the guidance of one person: in a counsel setting, things will be split up based upon either voting or volunteering. if it's going to be done that way, it will be most productive and worth while with a larger group of developers who wish to be apart of the group, because the more votes the more opinions and brainstorming power, and the more work will get volunteered to people who want to do the job - there shouldn't have to be any serious application process, only a small one so that the team knows who wants to join. this is especially true if the team isn't only for development purposes

also i never meant to answer why you needed a leader. i don't think you need one, i just point out that if the team is going leaderless, then the more the merrier, and the more the mightier

I'm still failing to understand why you think that the application process should not be serious if there is no leader? You need to explain that in more detail.

I sure as hell don't want a bunch of people on the team just because they want to be there, that would decrease the significance of being on the team and its effectiveness as a whole. It is quality vs. quantity; you seem to think that just because the team might not have a leader that it can't be a quality team, and I don't understand your reasoning.

Vima · #**110** 08-21-2009, 04:18 PM

With the right people, this could actually work.
But it will be hard.

Chompy · #**111** 08-21-2009, 05:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vima

With the right people, this could actually work.
But it will be hard.

Finding those will be a challenge.

Loriel · #**112** 08-21-2009, 06:18 PM

protip: First outline the tasks for the team, and then have applicants do actual work, and then decide what the team is going to look like if you still think it is necessary.

Elk · #**113** 08-21-2009, 06:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Loriel

protip: First outline the tasks for the team, and then have applicants do actual work, and then decide what the team is going to look like if you still think it is necessary.

Nice structure! I agree

Bell · #**114** 08-21-2009, 06:48 PM

To clear up a couple things. The GDT would be a subdivision of the PWA. Therefore under its guidance and jurisdiction. While our intent is to have the members of the PWA form the division, do the initial hiring of a core group. I have no desire to 'govern' it beyond encouragement and keeping it stable.

The reason for an admin is twofold. If the members help select an admin to help resolve any internal issues they are having with each other it will help keep the department stable. This department WILL have issues since its a highly testosterone driven entity with ego's that are larger than life. (No insult there guys, just a well known fact).

When it comes to new hires there will be a single entity to check the applications or recommended new hires. Sort through and toss any non viable ones then along with the rest of the group decide on whether a person would be a good addition. This way they won't have to come to a PWA every time they wish to hire or fire someone. Since it will be a multitalented group of individuals they will know better as to who would be a good addition and who wouldn't I believe.

I wouldn't say this person would necessarily be the "boss" in the sense you have to go to him for permission for everything. He will be more of the one person thats everyone goes to when they need something.

Bell · #**115** 08-21-2009, 06:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Loriel

protip: First outline the tasks for the team, and then have applicants do actual work, and then decide what the team is going to look like if you still think it is necessary.

Pretty much, yes.

WhiteDragon · #**116** 08-21-2009, 06:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bell

This department WILL have issues since its a highly testosterone driven entity with ego's that are larger than life. (No insult there guys, just a well known fact).

At least we're being honest.

Gambet · #**117** 08-21-2009, 07:27 PM

You should find out how many top-tier developers are actually interested first, since most of us either don't play anymore or are busy with obligations to our servers. Personally I'm not a fan of the idea since it doesn't bring anything new to the table that we currently couldn't do ourselves considering there are no benefits to joining the team other than a guild tag (I have my own connections with Stefan, the tag wouldn't change a thing with regards to that), but I don't really log on the game much anymore, I just browse through the forums and help with questions when I can.

Many of us have already released tons of scripts on the code gallery and continue to do so, we've written some documentation on the wiki and posted threads on the forums to clear confusion with using certain commands, and we try our best with the time that we have, but I'm not seeing how this team would change what is currently possible.

Vulcan · #**118** 08-21-2009, 07:52 PM

I keep seeing you guys saying that its something that you could do yourselves or its only a guild, anyone can make it, etc, etc....Well, why isn't anyone? Bell and the PWA are taking it upon themselves to put this group together and use what influence they have to make it work as best as possible. I doubt that the team will initially have everything it needs, but if things start moving along nicely, I would expect for Stefan to take an interest and become more involved.

Also, one thing I've not noticed in this thread (or maybe I've overlooked it?) is that there is no mention of private forums for this team. I think it would be highly beneficial for the team to have their own private forums for PWA/GDT communication, as well as a revival of the GlobalConnect forum for Classic Server management and PWA/GDT.

Gambet · #**119** 08-21-2009, 07:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vulcan

I keep seeing you guys saying that its something that you could do yourselves or its only a guild, anyone can make it, etc, etc....Well, why isn't anyone? Bell and the PWA are taking it upon themselves to put this group together and use what influence they have to make it work as best as possible. I doubt that the team will initially have everything it needs, but if things start moving along nicely, I would expect for Stefan to take an interest and become more involved.

We have done it, we just don't get together to work on a system as a team. Everyone has their own lives and their schedules so they contribute to the forums and the wiki when they can. Almost all questions are answered in the scripting section of the forums and we often provide good examples and documentations to back up these examples when answering questions.

In essence, we have fulfilled the expectations of this team without it ever officially being formed. Currently we work as a community, which is much more broad than narrowing it down to a small team.

WhiteDragon · #**120** 08-21-2009, 08:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gambet

post

While I agree with a number of the things you said, I believe this team does have the potential to do a number of things "the community" can't do.

For one, if it is made up of talented developers, it will have a strong influence on the decisions Stefan makes.
It isn't just about you "having connections with Stefan," it's about making a connection with the community and Stefan.

And yes, while many developers post examples and more in the Code Gallery, something this team could do is release a series of coherent and high-quality packages for servers to use (as discussed in the Scripting Forum's thread); nothing of this sort exists in the Code Gallery.

A strong team brings uniformity and coherency to the table, something that will never come out of a mass of developers releasing content.