Life In 19x19

Bantari wrote:As part of the above - it has been diligently worked on and maintained over the years (present hiatus notwithstanding)

Let's get real here. Serious development beyond tinkering stopped many, many years ago. Saying it has been "diligently" worked on in even the last 5 years is a joke. About the only area where significant effort has been put into has been the Android client, and that's a paid app. Getting back to the level where basic issues like sound are fixed would be a big improvement and get back to where the server has been for quite some time.

PaperTiger wrote:About the only area where significant effort has been put into has been the Android client, and that's a paid app.

So there hasn't been any work done except for the work that's been done? I guess that's true...

hyperpape wrote:

PaperTiger wrote:About the only area where significant effort has been put into has been the Android client, and that's a paid app.

So there hasn't been any work done except for the work that's been done? I guess that's true...

What I said is true. I said significant effort, to correspond with Bantari's "diligent", not just "any work". And I can back it up, because wms helpfully publishes his changelogs online:

http://files.gokgs.com/changeLog-2007.txt
http://files.gokgs.com/changeLog-2008.txt
http://files.gokgs.com/changeLog-2009.txt
http://files.gokgs.com/changeLog-2010.txt
http://files.gokgs.com/changeLog.txt (2011-present)

Notice the dropoff from 2007 to 2008? (Yes, you'll have to click to see.) In 2007 he was average updates about every 3 months. In 2008 he had a gap between releases in February and December in which no releases were made, and it's not like December's release made up for it by including a ton of changes.

The last update was in Mar of 2012, and was an Android-only update.

Other than the sound feature I do not see why KGS needs further "maintance". It's a finished product. One of the mistakes of kaya was it to try to implement too many features. KGS is simple, stable & intuitive - that's its advantage. And as I understand WMS's work he's just rewriting KGS webbased, without significant changes.

There are several voices asking for new features (e.g., iPad versions, talking clocks, one-colour go, video streaming). Each of these is nice in its own right. Each of them also requires an investment of time to build, test and maintain. Let's look at the practicalities.

1. KGS is free to use (although you have to pay for the additional KGS Plus lectures and tournaments). Therefore, revenue doesn't exist to pay Bill to work on it full-time.

2. Bill has an actual job. The job market in IT in the US now is difficult. If Bill were to quit paid employment in order to work on KGS for free, it's a financial sacrifice for him and there's certainly no guaranntee that he'd get a job equivalent to the one he has now. Why would he do this?

For the people who are complaining about KGS' functionality, there is an option. Work together to identify a financial model that would provide Bill with the time and financial support required to work on KGS full-time. It's easy to type indignant comments about how KGS should have more features. Instead, work to make it happen. Complaining is the easy part.

BigDoug wrote:It's easy to type indignant comments about how KGS should have more features. Instead, work to make it happen. Complaining is the easy part.

Bill won't let people work on KGS, that's precisely the complaint people are voicing in this thread.
There are a ton of ways Bill could let others contribute: make client code opensource, make server code opensource or just make the client protocol open so others can write clients.

BigDoug wrote:Work together to identify a financial model that would provide Bill with the time and financial support required to work on KGS full-time.

That's not "work to make it happen", that's "throw money at it and hope it will happen".
If Bill wants to keep it a one man show and not let others contribute, fine, his decision, but don't expect others to validate this kind of behaviour by sponsoring him.

In particular, I see no valid reason whats-o-ever not to have the client protocol public. (Most of the features people wish for are client-side.)
Looks to me like Bill just wants to keep a monopoly on which client is being used.
Good for him, but again, don't expect people to reward this kind of behaviour.

This is my point. Bill has stated repeatedly that he's going to retain ownership of the code and he doesn't want to bring in any other developers (i.e., he likes doing the development, not project managing others). Simply bringing up open source yet again isn't going to solve anything.

People want new functionaliity. At present, Bill doesn't have the time to build it as fast as people want. In the absence of a suitable funding model, progress on building new functionality is limited by the constraints on Bill's time.

BigDoug wrote:This is my point. Bill has stated repeatedly that he's going to retain ownership of the code and he doesn't want to bring in any other developers (i.e., he likes doing the development, not project managing others). Simply bringing up open source yet again isn't going to solve anything.

People want new functionaliity. At present, Bill doesn't have the time to build it as fast as people want. In the absence of a suitable funding model, progress on building new functionality is limited by the constraints on Bill's time.

This argument is one-sided, aligned with the perspective of the KGS administration. An argument to the contrary can be made for users of KGS, as follows:

Bill has stated repeatedly that he's going to retain ownership of the code and he doesn't want to bring in any other developers (i.e., he likes doing the development, not project managing others). Simply bringing up open source yet again isn't going to solve anything. People want new functionaliity. At present, Bill doesn't have the time to build it as fast as people want. In the absence of a suitable funding model, progress on building new functionality is limited by the constraints on Bill's time.
KGS users have stated repeatedly that an open source model would be better for KGS. Simply bringing up the fact that Bill doesn't want to make it open source yet again isn't going to solve anything. People want new functionality. At present, Bill won't build the new functionality as fast as people want. In the absence of suitable features, people will continue to gradually migrate to other go servers.

Everyone that's been involved in this argument knows the stances of both sides: Bill owns the server, doesn't have time to work on it. People want new features, they won't be implemented.

In your post, you suggest that the solution is to pay Bill money for his time. Maybe this would work, and maybe it wouldn't. But it's certainly not the only solution. KGS is KGS because of the community, and enough momentum builds up for people to move to a different server, it will happen.

Just look at this forum. People used to visit godiscussions.com, but after the site stopped functioning in a stable manner, the site effectively died and this one took over. Maybe if we paid the owner of godiscussions.com, it would have solved the problems with the site. But an alternative solution was found, and I believe the community is all the better for it.

So yes, people will continue to complain. And KGS can continue to blame the users for complaining. But what starts as a complaint is the seed of progress, and I look forward to the progress of the online go community, whether KGS is involved with it or not.

BigDoug wrote:Work together to identify a financial model that would provide Bill with the time and financial support required to work on KGS full-time. It's easy to type indignant comments about how KGS should have more features. Instead, work to make it happen. Complaining is the easy part.

Would Billy be willing to rename the server to the firm's name including ads and an included shop? But I doubt there's a western firm potent enough to pump more than 1K per year into such a server. Too few Go players in the western world. So it would come down to a self-financed model. KGS is not kaya and WMS has proved he doesn't quit easily, so it'd depend from the amount of members if one could pull off some one-time payment-deal (so that WMS could work on KGS for a year e.g.). But that's gross speculation. Maybe KGS is just his hobby and he wants to keep it there.... Again: Let Kaya's downfall be a warning to all of those with too high ambitions.

Pippen wrote:Again: Let Kaya's downfall be a warning to all of those with too high ambitions.

Why? Because one of the owners got a job offer and stopped working on the project? Having high ambitions is admirable. What practically gets accomplished is what makes a difference, but this usually starts with some sort of dream.

Kirby wrote:Why? Because one of the owners got a job offer and stopped working on the project? Having high ambitions is admirable. What practically gets accomplished is what makes a difference, but this usually starts with some sort of dream.

You have to agree that the dream didn't include letting others fix the bugs, and the bugs in kaya were much worse than KGS's sound problem on newer JREs.

oren wrote:You have to agree that the dream didn't include letting others fix the bugs, and the bugs in kaya were much worse than KGS's sound problem on newer JREs.

Perhaps, but this is unrelated to the topic of having high ambitions, is it not? Discounting high ambitions is like saying to quit before you start anything. How would KGS have been created without ambitions?

Kirby wrote:Perhaps, but this is unrelated to the topic of having high ambitions, is it not? Discounting high ambitions is like saying to quit before you start anything. How would KGS have been created without ambitions?

True. I didn't follow all the twists and turns of the thread at hand.

It is unfortunate that open protocol or open source servers have all failed. DGS is the only active one I can think of, but it's turn based.

Codexus wrote:wms

I wrote:William

BigDoug wrote:Bill

Pippen wrote:Billy

What's next, sugarplum?

oren wrote:It is unfortunate that open protocol or open source servers have all failed. DGS is the only active one I can think of, but it's turn based.

IGS was never really a failure, and contributed to KGS's inception. In any case, I stand by my previous comment that, if enough complaints and dissatisfaction build up, people will migrate. Either way, I'm confident that progress in online go will be made, whether it's an open source venture or not.