workflow and convention discussions

[TeoTwawki]

Here is my current thinking..

1. PR: For Freedom label:
Most community contributions of a non trivial nature, would get merged to their own temporary branch with the pr number in the branch name e.g. pr14\wm2-1_fix and we'd keep that for a future pull into allegedly-stable while immediately pulling into freedom. Once in both branches, the temporary branch would be removed. For this to work, the pr's base would still have to have been allegedly-stable, or else that woudl also bring in anything else freedom got which is very not desired.

• 1a. Actual feature/fix branches:
  I've seen branches made with prefixes categorizing them, I like that, keep doing that. 👍 This helps tell them apart from random pr's (along with my suggested pr\ prefix) and suggests where they should go after reviewing is complete.

2. PR: Fast-Track label:
Anything relatively simplistic and worry free, can go directly into allegedly-stable and then allegedly-stable can be directly pulled to freedom. This reduces the number of "feature branches" needed- we do not need to worry about freedom getting a commit that says "merged allegedly stable into freedom", only the reverse. We never want to see freedom merging into stable anymore, because freedom has an intentional lower standard to let new things in.

3. Topaz branch:
should we retire this? It was intended for the core team only, who at the time were working out of a separate repository. This would then have a bidirectional flow between itself and stable, as deemed sane by the core team and myself. That complicates merges as the history looks like a knot, and all work seems to have moved here now.

4. Brony meme name:
not that many people liked the joke so its gotta go, but renaming means updating all the urls again. I want to be SURE everyone is happy with a new name because I do not want to update it again after that ever. No more joke names if the repo and its github-group is becoming the real deal now.

[zach2good]

Branching Strategy
This is pretty much the system that was in place at the end of Old-Topaz and for all of Topaz-Next, just with the names changed. I can vouch for it being comparatively lightweight and easy to manage.

I vote for the prefix for long-lived branches to be feature, but pr is also fine. I think the numbering happens through git kraken automatically.

Topaz Branch
Old-Topaz and Topaz-Next are archived, backed up and frozen in time, we don't necessarily need to keep additional copies.

Branch Naming
Yeah, this is tough. allegedly-stable comes off as negative and freedom comes off as positive. We'd want to send the message that the one with the feature branches and experimental stuff is unstable and to be used at your own risk, and the base branch which we try to take care of is the one most people should use.

For old topaz names: I feel like release sends a message that a branch is a lot more stable than it really is, and canary isn't giving the message that "this is at your own risk".

I propose main as a base and pilot for main+prs. Other good names for pilot: experimental, dev, test, ongoing etc.

"Project"/Org Naming
Something non-sarcastic, non-jokey, that is abstract, not related to the source content (just in case) and isn't drawing from the previous projects, and nothing to do with crystals or precious stones...

Other emulators use things from their target game (Azeroth, UO, RO, etc.), could be nice to use Vana, XI, etc.

• VanaCore
• XICore
• CoreXI

But there might be too much of a link to Crisis Core etc.

Words that are somewhat related:

• Relic
• Void
• Odyssey
• Unity
• Omen
• Sea
• Sky
• Echoes
• Skirmish
• Surge / Resurge
• Magicite (questionable)
• Heir
• Light
• Oracles
• Shrine

EDIT:
There is also the ultra-utilitarian: xi-server or similar...

[TeoTwawki]

I was thinking feature\ for big things by the team or for huge new system dumps (like say, all work pertaining to implementing the adventuring fellow woudl get feature\fellow or the like), pr\ for the typical community ones that aren't ready stable branch yet.

If we drop the 3 branches and go to 2, renaming the branches when we rename the group is on the table but freedom sounding positive was intentional. If I name it what I really think of it nobody will touch it with a 10 foot pole. I want them to run it, but base contributions off a common place to both branches merge-ability which makes this tricky to try and balance for people who just dive in without checking the readme or having the most basic of comprehension how merging works.

And while the bar may need to move a bit I do have to insist a line be drawn somewhere for reading the readme, where it directs folks to use the right branch for their new work, so a firm decision on where that bar/line will be drawn and sticking to it needs to happen. How about base and new-content as branch names? its positive/negative neutral, and is exactly what it says on the tin.

[claywar]

I'd be concerned about someone seeing new-content and wanting to target their PR to that, but that's probably a minor issue that can be corrected.

[TeoTwawki]

valid concern, but hoping I wouldn't have to explain too often that its just the landing place for new things and that new work should be based off base so as to not include everyone else's new content along with theirs 🤞

[TeoTwawki]

Magicite (questionable)

while I would have expected SE to claim copyright on that word, somehow they didn't: https://store.steampowered.com/app/268750/Magicite/

Might generate sum confusion too tho.

[Era-Lusiphur]

I think trying to maintain a non-negative name for Freedom/Experimental is important. New and/or ambitious potential contributors might cut their teeth on items that would go there. You don't want to treat it as "dumping grounds" as it would cause people to shy away from submitting things they may feel would be ignored or not given a chance for inclusion.

[Era-Lusiphur]

I kind of threw it out there initially as a joke in our PM, but Lizzy (referencing Leaping Lizzy) is starting to grow on me for a name.

[TeoTwawki]

We could straight be the group LeapinLizards (no g) lol

[TeoTwawki]

ok, newest proposal for names after talking to people:

• DerpyProjectGroup -> LandSandBoat
• Topaz -> server
• allegedly-stable -> base
• freedom -> everything