Organizing and centralizing the credits

[zookeeper]

I want to get the credits properly sorted out in trunk.

First of all, let's make data/about.cfg the only place where the credits are defined. Currently we have credits defined in about.cfg, the wiki, and about.cpp. Coders are defined in about.cpp, but not as coders but as "developers" (the result: only coders are "developers" in the credits), which makes zero sense. I know some people have wanted to make the wiki page the "master list", but I disagree (for practical purposes). If you have good arguments for using the wiki instead of about.cfg, I kindly ask you to start a new thread about it, as I don't want this to get derailed by that debate. Besides, the structural changes (which are the main point after centralizing the credits) proposed here aren't really dependant on whether the "master list" is the wiki or about.cfg or whatever.

I'm thinking that it would be clearest to not use the word "developer" in the new structure - developer status is a bit weird to begin with (commit rights don't make anyone any more a "developer" than contributing a lot of art for example does), and the difference between a developer and an active contributor is irrelevant to the target audience anyway. To me it makes sense to list the main programmers, for example, under "Programming", and minor code contributors in a sub-category under that. Note that we also could later remove the "Additional Contributors" sub-category label altogether and just draw the names under that with a smaller font.

So, something like this is what I have in mind:

Code: Select all

Project Founder
    David White (Sirp)

Programming
    John W. C. McNabb (Darth Fool)
    Jérémy Rosen (Boucman)
    Jörg Hinrichs (Yogi Bear/YogiHH)
    Cédric Duval
    # And so on...

    Additional Contributors
        Jeff Breidenbach (Jab)
        Jane Doe
        # Random people who've contributed a bit of code, like patches, go here

Artwork & Graphics
    Francisco Muñoz (fmunoz)
    Richard Kettering (Jetryl)
    Hogne HÃ¥skjold (frame/freim)
    # And so on...

    Additional Contributors
        Robert Bolin (Zebulon)
        Zhukov
        # And so on...

Music
    Aleksi Aubry-Carlson (Aleksi)
    Timothy Pinkham (TimothyP)
    Joseph Toscano (zhaymusic.com)
    # And so on... (no need to separate additional contributors, since there aren't many)

Sound Effects
    Lari Nieminen (zookeeper)
    Corey Woodworth (woodwizzle)
    # And so on...

Multiplayer Maps and Balancing
    Bartek Waresiak (Dragonking)
    Mike Quiñones (Doc Paterson)
    Richard S. (Noy)
    Soliton
    Joshua Northey (Becephalus)
    Peter Groen (pg)
    Tom Chance (telex4)
    # And so on...

Packaging
    Cyril Bouthors (CyrilB)
    Darryl Dixon
    edge
    Isaac Clerencia
    Jay Hopping
    Jörg Hinrichs (Yogi Bear/YogiHH)
    Marcin Konicki (ahwayakchih)
    Marcus Phillips (Sithrandel)
    Mark Michelsen (skovbaer)

Internationalization and Translation Managing
    Cédric Duval
    David Philippi (Torangan)
    Mark Michelsen (skovbaer)
    Nils Kneuper (Ivanovic)
    Susanna Björverud (sanna)

Translations
    Afrikaans Translation
        András Salamon (ott)
        Erhard Eiselen
        Nico Oliver (nicoza)
        Renier Maritz

    Basque Translation
        Alfredo Beaumont (ziberpunk)
        Julen Landa (genars)
        Mikel Olasagasti (Hey_neken)

    Bulgarian Translation
        Anton Tsigularov (Atilla)
        Bono Nonchev
        Georgi Dimitrov (oblak)
    
    # And so on...

Some sections are missing since I got bored of copypasting, but the fine details are irrelevant - at this point the point is to get all the credits moved to one place. Also, I have some ideas how the large number of art contributors and translators could be squeezed to several adjacent columns, but that would require new code support so that can wait until we get the structure sorted out and the actual names up to date.

So, comments? Anything obvious I missed? It would also be rather nice if the people in lead of specific parts of the game (Jetryl/freim: art, etc) could volunteer to compile the complete list of contributors and such (by merging the names from the wiki and about.cfg) when the time for that comes, too.

EDIT: Oh, forgot to mention: I volunteer to do the actual reorganizing of about.cfg, if I get enough help with merging the names and such.

[Boucman]

when I read the title of the thread I was about to moderate it as spam

[Sapient]

"Multiplayer Maps and Balancing" should be: "Multiplayer Maps and Unit Balancing"

"Packaging" should be more specific, maybe "Release Packaging"

[Darth Fool]

I want to get the credits properly sorted out in trunk.
[/snip]
EDIT: Oh, forgot to mention: I volunteer to do the actual reorganizing of about.cfg, if I get enough help with merging the names and such.

Excellent, a volunteer is the most important thing. After the changes were made to enable the whole WML configurable credits, there was much discussion about reorganizing the credits and exactly how, but for lack of a volunteer (the obvious candidates all took a step back) it languished and things were left in the current state. The proposal is basically a good one. I would make one minor modification, and that is to leave Dave hard coded in the about.cpp as "Lead Developer", or maybe as "Battle for Wesnoth Original Design and Concept." It's not really necessary, and we do need to keep in mind that for total conversions like spacenoth, having Dave as lead developer doesn't really make sense, so that would imply either the latter choice, or just use your original proposal and move everyone to about.cpp. It's not as if keeping anything in about.cpp really protects against someone using the code and stealing credit for it. Maybe it is just me being sentimental. I trust your judgement in this matter.

[Viliam]

It seems to me that translators make more than half of credits list. What do you think about showing in credits only the translators of the player's selected language? This would reduce the list significantly.

It may seem a bit cruel towards the translators of other languages, but they did not directly contribute to the playing experience of that player. But if you think that everyone should appear on all lists, perhaps it would make sense to display the translators of the player's language first; then the remaining languages.

This would require giving to an "about" tag a new attribute "language", which would contain the code of the language, for a translators group.


Multiple columns would be nice, but the number of columns should depend on the screen size.

[turin]

Translators make up the vast majority of the credits, but they're at the end, so IMHO it's OK.

[Jetrel]

I know some people have wanted to make the wiki page the "master list", but I disagree (for practical purposes). If you have good arguments for using the wiki instead of about.cfg, I kindly ask you to start a new thread about it, as I don't want this to get derailed by that debate. Besides, the structural changes (which are the main point after centralizing the credits) proposed here aren't really dependant on whether the "master list" is the wiki or about.cfg or whatever.

Though I take ire towards not using the wiki, since committing changes takes about three times as long; I'll still agree to use about.cfg as the new list. There are other benefits (like authorization) towards doing so, and I'll defer to your choice since you're doing a ton of work with it.

However, you should know that I was the last person doing what you're attempting right now, and I was using the wiki as the master list. I think they set up something to copy it periodically, but if not, the wiki is much more up-to-date, just so you know.

I'm thinking that it would be clearest to not use the word "developer" in the new structure - developer status is a bit weird to begin with (commit rights don't make anyone any more a "developer" than contributing a lot of art for example does), and the difference between a developer and an active contributor is irrelevant to the target audience anyway. To me it makes sense to list the main programmers, for example, under "Programming", and minor code contributors in a sub-category under that. Note that we also could later remove the "Additional Contributors" sub-category label altogether and just draw the names under that with a smaller font.

Yes. Very good idea.



There is one demand I have, and that is that you DO NOT remove the painstakingly assembled descriptions I slowly put together that describe in detail what people actually did. I poured a ton of time into that, and it would be really uncool to discard that just to fit a "cleaner" format. It was difficult, because for some people, no one really knew who they were or what they did. It was a lot of sleuthwork, and reading forum archives/IRC logs to unearth that. Do not destroy that, or I will do what I haven't done in some time: lose my cool.

[Jetrel]

Translators make up the vast majority of the credits, but they're at the end, so IMHO it's OK.

Not to mention that the huge list is also ... impressive.

However, splitting the lists into two lists, one for translators, and one for "everyone else", would be a good idea.

[torangan]

I think it would make sense to display the translators of the currently selected language first and then the rest alphabetically sorted.

[zookeeper]

There is one demand I have, and that is that you DO NOT remove the painstakingly assembled descriptions I slowly put together that describe in detail what people actually did. I poured a ton of time into that, and it would be really uncool to discard that just to fit a "cleaner" format. It was difficult, because for some people, no one really knew who they were or what they did. It was a lot of sleuthwork, and reading forum archives/IRC logs to unearth that. Do not destroy that, or I will do what I haven't done in some time: lose my cool.

Ok. Now, is it enough to write who did what as WML comments next to the name (so that they are simply recorded and easy to check from the file), or should they be visible also in-game? Personally, I don't think they should be visible for the player (since I don't think it makes sense to present that much detail, that mostly would make the overall look messy, to the player), but I guess it could go either way.

I think it would make sense to display the translators of the currently selected language first and then the rest alphabetically sorted.

That would be good.

[allefant]

I think they set up something to copy it periodically, but if not, the wiki is much more up-to-date, just so you know.

I could get my bot to automatically do it the other way around, if it's decided that about.cfg is the master list. (So the wiki page could remain and would always display the newest version - but it shouldn't be edited anymore.)

[Eleazar]

I've started a sister topic here to address how the credit screen looks. I'd like to see the descriptions in the actuall game credits, but to do so nicely would require formating that may not be possible before 1.2.

I'd also be in favor of having 2 or 3 font sizes to indicate different levels of contribution. The credits are one of the few tangible means of rewarding contributors, and it makes sense that the recognition should roughly correspond to the contribution. If contributing a single patch or icon gets you all the recognition in the credits you will probably be every able to recieve, then the incentive value of the credits is greatly decreased. Whole games are built around the desire to "level up" It's not a big deal for me personally, but i think it would be appreciated by others.

[Maeglin Dubh]

What category do people like me (mainly writers, no code or artwork contributions) fit into? Not that I think I'm eligible for the credits yet, I should probably fix up a few more mainline descriptions before that happens, but I'm wondering if there's even such a precedent.

[zookeeper]

What category do people like me (mainly writers, no code or artwork contributions) fit into? Not that I think I'm eligible for the credits yet, I should probably fix up a few more mainline descriptions before that happens, but I'm wondering if there's even such a precedent.

I'd guess you'd go into "miscellaneous" now, unless we create new categories. We could create a new category for the writing, history and general setting though, in which case you'd fit there (who else, when not counting campaign authors/writers?).

Btw, I'm in the process of reorganizing about.cfg. When I'm done (kick me in a few days if I still haven't done it then), I'll post what I have so you guys can help with the name merging (and splitting people appropriately to main/minor contributors).

[Eleazar]

What category do people like me (mainly writers, no code or artwork contributions) fit into?

English Localization?