|
Re: ARCADE32/64 0.185
#365511 - 04/29/17 05:36 AM
|
|
|
> > Didn't mean to cause a huff. Certainly never would tell anyone what they can and
> > can't play.
>
> That's exactly what this binary does though.
>
> A lot of casual noobs see Arcade in the name and simply assume it's the best without
> knowing any better.
I'm fairly sure the target will go away soon anyway, or at the very least be much more difficult to build/maintain as things at a core level more towards closer integration and build targets more based on hardware / manufacturers than if the software running increments a counter that allows other inputs to work given a certain input.
The 'mame board' might consist of at least one absolute cunt who seems to care less about actual progress and more about telling me I've broken the rules by inventing new ones and threatening any devs who work with me with their status being removed too*, but at least they have the project direction right in that sense.
* and yes, this pisses me off, I worked with Osso on several drivers for the last release. I submitted things to Osso because he had directly asked me to look at them, so I was answering to him. He also worked on them, improved them etc. and was then reprimanded by a certain 'MAME board' member for committing them just because I'd worked on them 'without review' and apparently should have submitted them directly. In my opinion cutting out the person who had asked me to do the work, and who I was working with would have been just plain rude, you submit to who you're working with.
Shame, because I thought the toxicity of the team had lessened, but always some new way to show how low they've fallen, invented rules every chance they get. I think I'm just going to have to leave things and let them rot when nobody else looks at them unfortunately, because now I can't even work with somebody else on request without either being rude towards them or apparently breaking some new bullshit rule.
|
|
|
|
Re: ARCADE32/64 0.185
[Re: Haze]
#365512 - 04/28/17 04:40 PM
|
|
|
> The 'mame board' might consist of at least one absolute cunt who seems to care less
> about actual progress and more about telling me I've broken the rules by inventing
> new ones and threatening any devs who work with me with their status being removed
> too, but at least they have the project direction right in that sense.
Yeah, keep making shit up Haze. I haven't threatened anyone. I just said you don't get to make a very public show of quitting on your blog, insult us, delete your github account, then try to get stuff in through the back door.
Your code is to be reviewed, same as any external contributor. Why didn't you send your driver to code at mamedev dot org, which you of all people know very well is the address at which we accept submissions that aren't provided as PRs? You can't demand special treatment, and you can't go leaning on individual team members like that.
|
|
|
|
Re: ARCADE32/64 0.185
[Re: Vas Crabb]
#365513 - 04/28/17 04:42 PM
|
|
|
> > The 'mame board' might consist of at least one absolute cunt who seems to care less
> > about actual progress and more about telling me I've broken the rules by inventing
> > new ones and threatening any devs who work with me with their status being removed
> > too, but at least they have the project direction right in that sense.
>
> Yeah, keep making shit up Haze. I haven't threatened anyone. I just said you don't
> get to make a very public show of quitting on your blog, insult us, delete your
> github account, then try to get stuff in through the back door.
>
> Your code is to be reviewed, same as any external contributor. Why didn't you send
> your driver to code at mamedev dot org, which you of all people know very well is the
> address at which we accept submissions that aren't provided as PRs? You can't demand
> special treatment, and you can't go leaning on individual team members like that.
I worked with Osso, I wasn't asking for special treatment, I was working with a dev on the team, it was as much their submission as mine. I was working with him because he had put in a request for me to do so, I was reporting to him, it wasn't up to me to submit it, and I have it from him that you reprimanded him for it.
If that process I was following is unacceptable now, you've gone too far, you no longer care about preservation, just a bunch of bullshit standards and rules. Sorry, but you need to fuck off, you've absolutely the most toxic person I've had the displeasure of encountering.
Shouting 'special treatment' every time I do anything is bullshit and you know it. I care about preservation and nothing else. I will work with people, as has always been the case. You're throwing blocks in the way of that.
Osso doesn't really seem happy with the situation (losing my contributions) either, but you seem to have bullied half the team into thinking they're the little guys, so if they stand up it won't mean anything, they'll just be ejected from the team themselves. Not coming from Osso, but I've heard this from at least 5 devs now there are a lot of people 100% dissatisfied with the way you are doing things but afraid to speak out about it and would rather just make bland public statements in support to support whichever is the path of least resistance.
|
|
|
|
Re: ARCADE32/64 0.185
[Re: Haze]
#365515 - 04/28/17 06:20 PM
|
|
|
I hate emu politics and above all I hate when they're carried in public instead in private, like they should stay. This doesn't do any good for anyone.
FWIW I support the MAME board (I've voted for most of the elected devs) and to "reprimand" me is one of their unenviable tasks, so I have no problem with that.
On the other hand, as a long time MAME fan I'm sad to see Haze stop contributing cause I feel he could still do a lot for the project.
Hoping cooler heads will prevail and an agreement can be found.
|
.
|
|
|
Re: ARCADE32/64 0.185
[Re: Osso1]
#365518 - 04/28/17 07:41 PM
|
|
|
> I hate emu politics and above all I hate when they're carried in public instead in
> private, like they should stay. This doesn't do any good for anyone.
> FWIW I support the MAME board (I've voted for most of the elected devs) and to
> "reprimand" me is one of their unenviable tasks, so I have no problem with that.
> On the other hand, as a long time MAME fan I'm sad to see Haze stop contributing
> cause I feel he could still do a lot for the project.
> Hoping cooler heads will prevail and an agreement can be found.
no agreement can be found as long as the behaviour of the board continues in this fashion.
you asked me if I could work on these things, I agreed
in work terms that establishes a contract between me and you, I report to you, I submit to you.
this is what was done, you provided me with the materials to work with, I provided you with the result. a perfectly normal way of working, this is how 99% of my paid employment has worked!
you were reprimanded for that and have basically been bullied into not working with me.
how can you now say you support that, it definitely didn't come across that way when you mailed me, more from the apologetic tone of your mail that you regretted having to follow this nonsense but didn't want to cause any trouble, because that's exactly what it is, nonsense.
so somebody, tell me where the 'double standard' is in any of this, I've followed normal contractual style procedures that are used all the time yet the person contracting me has basically been reprimanded for doing so.
every time something like this comes up I get branded a 'MAME hater' too which is ridiculous. MAME, at least the reason it exists and purpose behind it is something I love more than almost anything else, but the current team, especially the board, the member in question being one of those spewing this 'MAME hater' bullshit actually make it impossible to want to contribute, that's just how incredibly bad they are. Those 'MAME hater' comments were the point at which, despite trying to contribute and still having some outstanding submissions I decided it wasn't even worth keeping my github account since somebody had such twisted perceptions, so if you want to know why I'm not on github, that's why.
You said you dislike that I won't be able to contribute, and if possible I should put the project first, but that's what I've been doing for years, and all it allows is this BS to continue, heck it's what I was doing by working with you, I don't want to be fully involved, but I care about the cause enough to be willing to help when asked because I shared your concerns about these not being handled, yet even that gets slammed down. You think that is fair? People help other people all the time, it's teamwork.
The only 'double standards' are coming from the team and their disgusting way of handling anything I do.
To think, they got rid of Guru, he was a saint compared to the way the current lot act.
You've not done anything wrong, I've not done anything wrong, don't be bullied into thinking otherwise.
Next they'll probably be claiming I worked on these on purpose and submitted them this way just to cause drama, when really, the drama disgusts me and I thought they were past all that shit or I wouldn't have bothered at all, in fact had you not suggested I look at them and provided me with the materials I wouldn't have looked at them at all.
If I decide to do anything else in the future at all I'm just going to self-publish. I'll work for people, as I've done here, and as I've done before when there have been dumps people have been concerned about and think need attention, but the team as an entity, in it's current state, I have no interest at all in working for, it's toxic. It's nice to have people to work with and there are many good devs on the team, but the team as a whole is something I don't need nor want in my life, and no, that isn't asking for special treatment either, that's me saying I care about emulation but everything else can do one, I'm sick of it.
|
|
|
|
Re: ARCADE32/64 0.185
[Re: Vas Crabb]
#365529 - 04/29/17 01:44 AM
|
|
|
> You can't demand
> special treatment, and you can't go leaning on individual team members like that.
I don't think Haze "leaned on a team member", it sounds like, from what people are saying here, that like a team member asked Haze to review/improve some code, which he did, and the combined result was then committed by said team member.
LN
|
"When life gives you zombies... *CHA-CHIK!* ...you make zombie-ade!"
|
|
|
Re: ARCADE32/64 0.185
[Re: Lord Nightmare]
#365530 - 04/29/17 02:38 AM
|
|
|
> > You can't demand
> > special treatment, and you can't go leaning on individual team members like that.
>
> I don't think Haze "leaned on a team member", it sounds like, from what people are
> saying here, that like a team member asked Haze to review/improve some code, which he
> did, and the combined result was then committed by said team member.
>
> LN
I originally mailed Osso offering to help with 'Victory' because I know encryption isn't his speciality and there was a possibility I could give him a decrypt function so that he could get it working, or failing that, see what it needed. As it happens the encrypted dump is incomplete (missing rom on PCB) and the bootleg dump has 2 bad program roms, including the data that's missing from the original, so that didn't go very far. It's probably still possible to decrypt what is there, but makes more sense to wait until the bootleg is redumped.
Osso then said 'hey, these things haven't been looked at, they're kinda important, can you take a look at them, I fear nobody will otherwise'
This wasn't in my original plans, but given the request and importance of getting the work done in a timely manner, I agreed, because I was also concerned about them. I knocked up some drivers, keeping him in the loop at all points during development. In the end, for Acchi, it was a simple tilemap based (no sprites) system. Osso improved the dips and inputs etc. in them and then submitted them, and given the simplicity of the system I'd consider his role in the driver to be more or less equal, both things needed doing, I did one thing, he did another.
Space Cyclone he added a few extra notes about the sound hardware and marked the bad rom as bad once it had been confirmed with Smit / Shoutime before committing as that stalled early on due to the bad rom, he also apologised for not picking up on the bad rom earlier, which was fair enough, but at least we had something ready for when it gets redumped.
So the work was the result of both of us, that happens in the background all the time yet nobody kicks up a fuss. As soon as I'm involved, people do? This is the only double standard I'm seeing.
My only responsibility was to Osso, an established and important key member of the team who has been involved in a lot of code cleanups, so to even say the code was 'unreviewed' is pushing it, to reprimand him for it, ridiculous and disrespectful towards him, especially given the nature of the work; two very much independent drivers, one of which was shelved until a better dump comes along and thus not really worth spending additional time on until that happens.
So I really wonder why emudrama and politics comes into play, when really what we should be focusing on here is what we've managed to learn from the drivers, and what needs doing in the future (redumps etc.) This was a very simple case of lending a hand. The fact that these warnings bypassed discussion from the rest of the team to the point they were unaware of them (and even told to keep their noses out when asking) is IMHO worse than anything either myself or Osso did.
Maybe it's just different approaches. I prefer to respect the ability and judgement of people I'm working with, not look down on them. I have very little time or respect for people incapable of doing that. Too much micromanagement is not a good thing, when it becomes aggressive micromanagement, even worse. The current model I feel is very much aggressive micromanagement taken to extreme levels, there are no benefits to that. Maybe others disagree, but that's how I feel about it, that is what has driven me away, if you don't trust your developers, you lose them.
The funny thing is, I was actually preparing something else I'd been working on at the same time for submission through the usual channels, but given the attitudes demonstrated decided it simply wasn't worth it.
|
|
|
| ASI |
|
MAME Fan
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 02/23/10
|
|
Posts: 30
|
|
Loc: UK
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Re: ARCADE32/64 0.185
[Re: Haze]
#365564 - 04/30/17 06:03 PM
|
|
|
Sounds like the playground mentality strikes again.
I would agree with haze on that he was asked by a dev to look into a problem, which he did of his own will, then reported back to the person who asked him about it. (Osso)
Osso the makes any necessary changes and submits the code through the correct procedure.
I cant see any problem with this, and yes this is how most software development and business in general operates. Reporting back to the person who raised the problem in first place.
And really does it matter in who fixes the problems anyway, for the benefit of all, is it not better to have these corrections implemented than leave them in an unfixed state for however long.
Sorry but the bitching is very reminiscent of the old C64 scene at the latter end of its days, so much arguing and fighting over trivial matters.
There are no sides if it benefits the project of documenting our arcade machines for future generations.
|
|
|
|
Re: ARCADE32/64 0.185
[Re: ASI]
#365581 - 04/30/17 11:43 PM
|
|
|
It's great that you know nothing of the discussions that went on across a private mailing list, other than Haze's description which could charitably be described as slanted, yet your ignorance on the topic has left you undeterred from sharing your unsolicited and - generally, irrelevant -
opinion.
|
|
|
| ASI |
|
MAME Fan
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 02/23/10
|
|
Posts: 30
|
|
Loc: UK
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Re: ARCADE32/64 0.185
[Re: MooglyGuy]
#365587 - 05/01/17 08:21 AM
|
|
|
My comments were not meant as a criticism to any of the devs, who all are much appreciated. If i have offended anyone with my comments then i apologize.
And no the general public dont know what was said between any of the devs on the mailing lists. But as that is a private list then that is where it should stay. Including your comments of disrespect other users.
As my comments where of general practice in business where is the real problems.
But as your indications are that no one other than devs on the mailing lists should comment as we dont know anything.
And as we are just mere mortals (users) then we should just do as we are told.
Like i said i have been around long enough to have seen all this before. I just feel its sad that while we are all in this for the love of these machines, there still exists so much hatred and bitching.
|
|
|
|
Re: ARCADE32/64 0.185
[Re: MooglyGuy]
#365595 - 05/01/17 12:39 PM
|
|
|
> It's great that you know nothing of the discussions that went on across a private mailing list,
Is Haze still on that list?
>other than Haze's description which could charitably be described as slanted,
Well, you could share the facts from your POV instead of
> yet your ignorance on the topic has left you undeterred from sharing your unsolicited and - generally, irrelevant - opinion.
kicking other peoples asses, once again.
From Haze's posts and Vas Crabb response it sounds like Mamedev will accept external submissions (code, ROMs and infos) exclusively via mamedev dot org;
working with, or sending code to, individual team members isn't an option anymore, which would be a shame if true.
Or it is just a speacial Haze treatment, which would also be sad.
|
|
|
|
Re: ARCADE32/64 0.185
[Re: RdW]
#365597 - 05/01/17 02:46 PM
|
|
|
> From Haze's posts and Vas Crabb response it sounds like Mamedev will accept external
> submissions (code, ROMs and infos) exclusively via mamedev dot org;
> working with, or sending code to, individual team members isn't an option anymore,
> which would be a shame if true.
> Or it is just a speacial Haze treatment, which would also be sad.
The preferred method for accepting code submissions is via pull request on github. This makes it easy for the team to provide feedback and get any issues addressed. You can see this in action clearly with a PR like this one. Comments can be placed alongside the code in question, discussion history is preserved, and everything is out in the open.
If you can't use a PR for whatever reason, the e-mail address for contributing code is "code at mamedev dot org" (please don't post the actual machine-readable address - spambots tend to pick it up). This address has a bus factor higher than one and ensures the team gets to a chance to see it. Of course the review/feedback process is more cumbersome if it's done this way, because it has to go back and forth over e-mail.
If you do e-mail an individual team member, to code is subject to the same standard review as any other external submission. That means the developer either has to apply this standard themselves, post it to the list for review, or create a branch and open a pull request. There have been multiple instances where an individual has pushed something sent to them individually resulting in outcry from the team. There was a prominent example of this concerning a handheld system that didn't involve me or Haze at all (the person who pushed the submission and subsequently reverted it was mmicko, you can search commit history if you really want to find out what it was).
MAME is a big project, and it's now two decades old. We have, to use a buzzword, a lot of "technical debt". This makes it harder to maintain and improve things. Part of it is caused by things improving but code not being updated to make the most of it. We have a lot of code that isn't making the best use of C++14, because no-one's taken the time to go over it and make applicable improvements. Some of it is crud from when someone re-implements some common component and doesn't update all the uses. But there's a lot of stuff where people have just made a poor effort and then abandoned the code.
As a project grows, it becomes more important to keep it clean to avoid ending up with an unsupportable mess. As such we have to maintain some kind of minimum standard for what goes into the tree. Issues are raised all the time with code pushed by team members as well. A few releases ago we had probably half a dozen commits by team members reverted. It isn't personal, it happens to the best of us. You just don't hear about it because it's handled on appropriate channels by people who act like adults (for the most part).
No-one is being singled out, there's no change in policy. We are slowly raising the bar for code quality, because we want to make sure MAME will be around for another two decades, and not become that mess of unreadable code that no-one wants to touch.
|
|
|
|
Index 
Threaded 
Re: ARCADE32/64 0.185
Reply
[Re: 
