Replies: 1 comment
-
|
@Cernelius Cheers... |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
With reference to:
#12333
Was that functionality removed without even asking in forum? Am I missing something?
Anyway, my suggestion is never removing any functionalities without leaving a discussion about it open in forum for at least 1 year (not every map-maker checks forum constantly) and never opening such discussion for any functionalities added less than 5 years ago (giving at least some years for map-makers to use new functionalities).
If agreed, this would need documentation as guide-lines for developers about removing functionalities.
What other functionalities have been removed like that?
Though I would agree that "the_pact_of_steel" should be complete as a guide.
I think having added this functionality without having documented it in "the_pact_of_steel" has been sloppy if @WCSumpton is right there is no example in it.
My suggestion (in line with what I just said) is that, if a functionality is found non-used by any maps comprising the_pact_of_steel, a developer should give an ultimatum in forum for anyone to add it to this map and removing the functionality if nobody does it within 1 year thereafter (no matter if the functionality has been added recently).
This should actually never happen if it is agreed that every game-related functionality should always be documented in the "the_pact_of_steel" game (especially new additions).
I remember that the fuctionality was added by @ron-murhammer (and I consider it a good addition even though I've not used it so far, but I intend to).
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions