Citadel Community

Please use the following template when applying for the github maintainer status.


Experience with Github: I could maintain a git repository without github / 10

Experience with BYOND: 3 years, on and off coding.

Experience with SS13: 3 years. I mean, I've literally been on Citadel the whole time so...

Experience on Citadel?(Main/RP): 3 years. 2.5 spent on main, switched to RP when main's updates started not being to my liking. Probably won't go back to main.

Why do you feel like you'd make a good maintainer?: I read code fluently, can spot bugs, and I test things before adding them. Also Travis is broken right now and my issue report on it has gone ignored for ages so even if this flops I wouldn't mind somebody paying attention to https://github.com/Citadel-Station-13/C ... issues/343

EDIT 1: After talking to some people, I was informed that explaining why I think the repositories are mismanaged.
To begin with, I would like to note that github (and similar tools) appeal to the lowest common denominator. Yes, experienced users can get a lot out of it, but it makes it possible for even the rookiest of rookies to get started with git.

The reason why I think CitadelRP's repo was mismanaged was simple: No history from Virgo is preserved. In this case, Deathride (it's his name on the initial commit) cloned the Virgo repository, copied all the code files into another folder, and initialized a new repository there (or used git rebase), which was then uploaded to github as a new repo. Since the histories aren't related, a smart bot that uses Git history to take commits from one branch and move them to another would not be able to intelligently merge any conflicting commits, hereby forcing this "modularization" rule.

too low github activity
and a -1 because if i can't find myself able to think you'd make a good admin i'm not going to support a maintainer app because it's also staff rank on par with game admin, with associated in game and discord permissions and rank, not to mention maintainer being people with write access to git and the people deciding whether contributions go through or not and code direction.

You have a history of refusing to comply with the RP server codebase's only hard standard (Modularization), and you have a "If upstream wants the fixes, then they should fix it themself" attitude when told to send your bugfixes upstream.

I'm still weary about you having any kind of staff role after the Promethean shenanigans you were a part of - regardless of whether or not you fixed them, so I'm gonna have to drop a -1 on this.

deathride58 wrote: You have a history of refusing to comply with the RP server codebase's only hard standard (Modularization), and you have a "If upstream wants the fixes, then they should fix it themself" attitude when told to send your bugfixes upstream.

The "modularization" standard does nothing but turn merge conflicts into compiletime errors. If I add something to Citadel, and then Virgo comes around and says "I want that" and copies it over verbatim, all that happens is the mirrored PR merges cleanly and then Travis says nope compile error. Merge conflicts are magnitudes easier to fix in git.

As for Virgo proper, I'm not coding for them, but I'm not against them taking it if they want it. Sure, bugfixes and all that could go up, but for some reason CitRP has no shared history with Virgo which just means too much effort for something that otherwise doesn't make a difference to Citadel.

Speaking of the no shared history, I still don't have a solid answer as to why the CitRP repository was inited (or rebased) from a certain commit in Virgo rather than just being a clone (not to be confused with a fork).