Difference between revisions of "Category talk:Robot In Development"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(comment) |
RobertWalker (talk | contribs) (Category renamed) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
* I think the category: "Robots In Development" may be useful to group all robots that can be considered incomplete, all bots with version like 0.X, bots that go further 1.0 can be still under development but it can be considered "improvement" rather than "development". Marco M B | * I think the category: "Robots In Development" may be useful to group all robots that can be considered incomplete, all bots with version like 0.X, bots that go further 1.0 can be still under development but it can be considered "improvement" rather than "development". Marco M B | ||
* Personally, I like "Unreleased Robots" as a name. To me, "in development" just means they're actively being worked on - it does not mean that they are unreleased or "non-final". We could also have an "In Development" or "Actively Developed" section, but that would be tough to keep up to date. As for the version number - well, some people have some pretty polished bots that are not yet at version 1.0 =), so I'm not sure that would work. --[[User:Voidious|Voidious]] 14:40, 14 December 2007 (UTC) | * Personally, I like "Unreleased Robots" as a name. To me, "in development" just means they're actively being worked on - it does not mean that they are unreleased or "non-final". We could also have an "In Development" or "Actively Developed" section, but that would be tough to keep up to date. As for the version number - well, some people have some pretty polished bots that are not yet at version 1.0 =), so I'm not sure that would work. --[[User:Voidious|Voidious]] 14:40, 14 December 2007 (UTC) | ||
| − | * If real life takes over for someone or they (*gasp*) lose interest in Robocode, their robot may be left in the "Robots in development" category until doomsday, when really the robot has stagnated and is no longer being developed. As the author of a currently-unreleased robot, I like the "Unreleased robots" category because a bot is either released or it isn't, and the passage of time by itself | + | * If real life takes over for someone or they (*gasp*) lose interest in Robocode, their robot may be left in the "Robots in development" category until doomsday, when really the robot has stagnated and is no longer being developed. As the author of a currently-unreleased robot, I like the "Unreleased robots" category because a bot is either released or it isn't, and the passage of time by itself won't change that. [[User:RobertWalker|RobertWalker]] 18:01, 14 December 2007 (UTC) |
*Okay okay, i'm sorry, I thought it made sense at the time to name it this, but yah, "Unreleased Robots" is better. --[[User:Chase-san|Chase-san]] 15:17, 15 December 2007 (UTC) | *Okay okay, i'm sorry, I thought it made sense at the time to name it this, but yah, "Unreleased Robots" is better. --[[User:Chase-san|Chase-san]] 15:17, 15 December 2007 (UTC) | ||
| + | * I've gone ahead and renamed the category. (Actually, MediaWiki doesn't let you rename, so I've created the new category and moved links over to it.) [[User:RobertWalker|RobertWalker]] 15:29, 18 December 2007 (UTC) | ||
Latest revision as of 16:29, 18 December 2007
Category name
Shouldn't this category be called "Robots in development"? Or, better yet, "Unreleased robots"? (Since "Robots in development" can suggest that they are still being modified after they have been released.) --AaronR 17:56, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
- I think you are right: "Unreleased robots" would be a much better category name. RobertWalker 19:02, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yep, good thought. A lot of bots are unreleased but not developed any further. GrubbmGait 00:56, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- I think the category: "Robots In Development" may be useful to group all robots that can be considered incomplete, all bots with version like 0.X, bots that go further 1.0 can be still under development but it can be considered "improvement" rather than "development". Marco M B
- Personally, I like "Unreleased Robots" as a name. To me, "in development" just means they're actively being worked on - it does not mean that they are unreleased or "non-final". We could also have an "In Development" or "Actively Developed" section, but that would be tough to keep up to date. As for the version number - well, some people have some pretty polished bots that are not yet at version 1.0 =), so I'm not sure that would work. --Voidious 14:40, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- If real life takes over for someone or they (*gasp*) lose interest in Robocode, their robot may be left in the "Robots in development" category until doomsday, when really the robot has stagnated and is no longer being developed. As the author of a currently-unreleased robot, I like the "Unreleased robots" category because a bot is either released or it isn't, and the passage of time by itself won't change that. RobertWalker 18:01, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- Okay okay, i'm sorry, I thought it made sense at the time to name it this, but yah, "Unreleased Robots" is better. --Chase-san 15:17, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
- I've gone ahead and renamed the category. (Actually, MediaWiki doesn't let you rename, so I've created the new category and moved links over to it.) RobertWalker 15:29, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
