NeoLemmix > NeoLemmix Main

Future of NeoLemmix development

(1/4) > >>

namida:
So, I haven't really been getting much work done on NeoLemmix in the past year and a half or so. A bit here and there, but not nearly enough to really keep the project going.

NeoLemmix is, overall, in a good state. Sure, there are some UI bugs that would be nice to get rid of, some room for better QOL features, etc, but overall, it's the most popular engine for a reason - because it's in good shape, it does what's needed, it isn't overly bloated with features, etc.

I had already decided to work towards a final version as a vague goal, but I have made the decision that I'm going to move very quickly towards that now. Most proposed features / suggestions are not going to happen, and likewise for minor fixes.

I do intend to do one more major update in the traditional sense (ie: an update that brings significant new features), with possibly one more "major" version after that for bugfixing purposes, in particular for any bugs that are introduced in the next update. This is because of the new objects - they are very close to ready, and it doesn't make sense to throw that work away at this point when not much further effort is needed to get it ready for release.

However, other proposed features - such as an improved replay editor - are going to be discarded, so that things can be wrapped up. I am also going to discontinue any further work on the editor, except for what is necessary to properly support the new objects (most of which is already implemented in the codebase and released in experimental form alongside the new objects experimental player).

I realise this might not be the news some people wanted to hear, but it had pretty much de-facto become the situation anyway - all I'm really doing here is making it official.

To address this before anyone suggests it - no, I do not want to hand further development of the game over to someone else. With that being said, NeoLemmix is open source, and anyone who wants to do so is welcome to fork it to create a new engine - SuperLemmix is already a case of this, though it may be that someone wants to create a fork that retains the NeoLemmix philosophies but continues to add / improve new features within that. It would then be for content creators and players to decide whether to adopt the fork or stick with NL's final version. Likewise, anyone who wants to create their own editor (either using the existing one as a basis, or an entirely new one) is of course free to do so. NeoLemmix and its tools will remain open source and free for anyone who wishes to fork, to do so.

WillLem:
A few questions that were destined to arise eventually:

1) Since I’m currently working on some UI stuff in NeoLemmix anyway, would you like me to go ahead and add in some of the QOL features present in SuperLemmix (stuff like Esc to exit forms, the ability to use keystrokes to browse and load levels, wider dropdowns, improved hotkey config form, etc)? I could post it all over to you in one go or on a feature-by-feature basis, whichever you’d prefer. Same goes for the Editor’s GUI updates.

2) Would you prefer it if a forked version of NeoLemmix didn’t use the same name? If we continue to develop it as a community beyond its final version, it should ideally still be called “NeoLemmix”, since that’s so well established now. And it’s my understanding that no changes would be made to this version that didn’t get significant approval from the community anyway. Perhaps simply adding “CE” (Community Edition) to the version number could be enough to mark it as the newer version without the need to re-title it completely?

3) Or, perhaps you might reconsider handing development over? I’ve learned a lot over the past year with SLX and I know the codebase well enough by now that I could at least help to bugfix, even if new features are kept to an absolute minimum (and by that, I mean I would probably limit my input to stuff I’ve already done for SLX that is a no-brainer for/is highly requested for NL). Just thought I’d ask because it’s been a while since the OP and there’s increasing talk of me potentially working on the existing version of NeoLemmix. I’d rather go ahead with guidance and approval, and an understanding that since I’ve got SLX out of my system I’m a decent (if not the only) candidate for taking the wheel. OK if not, of course - it would be much easier to just continue working on SLX anyway!

4) ETA on the next NeoLemmix update? Maybe l can help?

Armani:
My understaning is that Superlemmix is a kind of "every stuff WillLem wanted to do" project.
And that is the reason why I(and I'm sure there're more people) didn't bother to reply or give opinion on some of the controversial physics changes like dd, timed bomber, classic mode, many many new powerful skills, making both sides force field... etc. I want Neolemmix to be remain the way it is right now. Especially in terms of physics.

To be honest, I think Superlemmix has gone too far after it branched off from Neolemmix to use the same name with NL, both Neolemmix or Neolemmix CE. They are very different games and have different userbase.

WillLem:

--- Quote from: Armani on March 04, 2024, 11:31:58 AM ---I want Neolemmix to be remain the way it is right now. Especially in terms of physics.
...
I think Superlemmix has gone too far after it branched off from Neolemmix to use the same name with NL, both Neolemmix or Neolemmix CE. They are very different games and have different userbase.

--- End quote ---

You've definitely misunderstood what I'm asking. Apologies for the confusion, allow me to clarify:

I'm not suggesting that SuperLemmix become the new NeoLemmix. At all. We agree here - they are both very different and will remain different platforms for the reasons you've correctly identified (different physics, timebombers, classic mode, powerful new skills, etc).

What I'm asking is whether I should help to continue development of NeoLemmix itself, adding only features that the NeoLemmix userbase has specifically requested (or QOL/GUI improvements that would not affect gameplay or physics).

I could do this either by taking the wheel with the "official" version, simply continuing with version 13.0.0, etc - or, if namida would still prefer not to allow this, then do so by creating a new fork, as suggested.

My question is then: should such a fork be re-named to something other than "NeoLemmix"? I think it shouldn't, because its development would simply be a continuation of the existing version (i.e. no controversial SuperLemmix features!). At most, it should have something appended to the version number, to mark it as the "next gen" or whatever.

So, the new fork could be called NeoLemmix CE 1.0, or something like that, and would represent a continuation of the current NeoLemmix lineage as opposed to an entirely new version like SuperLemmix.

IchoTolot:
I would try to avoid yet another fork. Too many versions are just confusing.

But implementing some QOL/UI-Improvents that a larger majority agreed on (and were properly tested), I would say would be a good thing.

If namida agrees I would say you helping out with some QOL/UI stuff can be very beneficial for everyone. :)

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page