[IGDA LCPP] Re: A very small part of the first draft of the TDD
- From: Dean Butcher <mathematix@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: igda_lcpp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 17:43:12 +0000
Hi Jim
I think it would be better to have it as a separate document, or maybe
as an addendum to the TDD?
Dean.
On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 10:55:55 -0000, Jim Verhaeghe <jim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Dean,
>
> I meant what compiler environment will be used (Such as .NET 2003, etc.).
> Perhaps it would be better to make a separate document that is just a white
> paper on how to build our project. We could just throw that on the site in
> Wiki format and leave it at that.
>
> Jim Verhaeghe
> Contract Game Developer
> jim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> -----Original Message-----
> From: igda_lcpp-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:igda_lcpp-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Dean Butcher
> Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 1:49 AM
> To: igda_lcpp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [IGDA LCPP] Re: A very small part of the first draft of the TDD
>
> Hi Jim
>
> Your points have been noted and the document will be amended
> accordingly, just one little question though. In and earlier email to
> the list you had specified
>
> [quote]
> I'm not concerned with the development environment. Ultimately I want to
> read this and be able to understand what you guys will be doing to make the
> game given the resources you have.
> [/quote]
>
> I had assumed that this meant that such detail as how to compile and
> the other specifics of the development environment should be omitted,
> that's why I'd left it out of the document. This has left me a little
> unclear as to what exactly should be left out about the environment?
>
> Cheers Jim!
> Dean.
>
> On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 19:08:23 -0000, Jim Verhaeghe <jim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > No worries mate, just make sure we can export the document as a word
> > document. Ultimately for putting it up as a Wiki (you'll have to forgive
> > me, I haven't played with Wiki that much), I think it should be a living
> > document. So we don't continually post updates, but update the document
> > that is on the site, hopefully with some source control so we can go back
> to
> > look at the previous versions if necessary. Let me know if I am just
> > blathering like an idiot and correct me!
> >
> >
> >
> > As for the TDD, it is a good start guys. A couple things are:
> >
> > Kunal's name has disappeared from the authors (credit everyone)
> > I like the new approach to the function descriptions with the bullet
> points,
> > very nice.
> > There was a section describing how to get the SDK working with the
> project,
> > but it has been removed. I'd put it back in, as it seemed helpful.
> > When using terms like SDK, make sure the first time you use it you use the
> > entire name (i.e. Software Development Kit (SDK)). Then the next time you
> > just need to use SDK. This way, those who aren't familiar with the term
> > will have seen it and understand what it stands for. It may behoove us to
> > put in a glossary section at the end as a reference for those who missed
> the
> > initial use of the acronyms.
> > Big thing is be consistent (somewhat related to 4). In the SDK set up
> > section there was a start to using the full name, however it is backwards
> to
> > all other references like in later in the document. It was "SDK (Software
> > Development Kit)", and later there was "heads-up display (HUD)." I prefer
> > the latter, as it highlights the acronym.
> > Add a question/pitfall section, and just throw as many questions in there
> as
> > you can think of, then start removing them once they have been
> > satisfactorily answered.
> > Please use left justify only. (This is more a matter of personal
> preference,
> > but when the text is spaced inconsistently it bothers me, and that happens
> > quite frequently when using filenames, etc. as we do in technical
> > documents.)
> >
> >
> >
> > That is pretty much it. I'd say we are about 30-40% done. I know it is a
> > lot of work, but keep plugging away. Hopefully you'll be finished by next
> > meeting.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Jim Verhaeghe
> >
> > Contract Game Developer
> >
> > jim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> >
> > From: igda_lcpp-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:igda_lcpp-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > On Behalf Of Michael Lloyd Lee
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2005 3:57 PM
> > To: igda_lcpp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: [IGDA LCPP] Re: A very small part of the first draft of the TDD
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Not to burst your bubble, but the UML idea may not be the right way to go.
>
> > Assume you are going to be sending this document to several people at a
> > publisher, so you want a format that everyone can easily use (without
> having
> > to download viewers, etc).
> >
> > I think have UML diagrams will still be useful, even if not for the TDD.
> > Plus we can export to GIF, and embed into the document.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I'll look at the document today and give my 2 pennies worth. Also, if you
> > are looking at a way to have it as a living document, we should put it up
> on
> > the Wiki site so all can work on it there, rather than send it around via
> > email (as it is generally less protected).
> >
> > By that do you mean uploading lots of Word docs, or using a Wiki page?
> >
> > If the former, I'd pref. to use SCM software over lots of revisions of a
> > word document with the version meta data encoding into the file name[1].
> >
> > [1] As an x-BeOS user I have a aversion to placing Meta data in the
> > filename ;-)
> >
> > -- Michael Lloyd Lee * M: mlk@xxxxxxxxx "He who makes
> > no mistake* W: http://j2mevnc.sf.net Never makes anything"* A:
> > 474c High Rd, E10 6QA
>
>
Other related posts:
