10 июля 2016, 00:26 (1851 день назад) № 10122
Попытался тут вынести мозг вебмастеру ссылка
(Gargaj / Conspiracy) по-поводу того, что они не добавляют новые платформы в список (несмотря на просьбы мои и многих других людей), из-за чего новые работы для разных интересных компьютеров попадают в категорию wild вперемешку с home video и обречены на забвение.
Увы, попытка не увенчалась успехом... Вот наша переписка (с его разрешения):
> Just trying to understand why some platforms present in the list (for example "Wonderswan"
> with total 2 prods), but others are not - for example, very popular US computer TI-99/4a
> or console Magnavox Odyssey 2 (Philips Videopac).
> There are a lot of prods on pouet that marked as "Wild" like home video because list of
> platforms so small and it seems never updates (I've tried to leave requests but no result).
> It is really big problem in my opinion because it is impossible to find prods which are
> not in the list.
> Just for example - several month ago I started to code intro for TI-99/4a. But I couldn't
> check already existing prods (there were some!). Now, after I've done two prods, other
> people won't find them.
> Pouet - central demoscene resource. So if it is impossible to find prod for TI on pouet,
> for many people there is no demoscene on TI at all. Not good, right?
There's no simple answer to any of those complaints but I'll try to address them either way:
Some platforms exist because the previous admin was easy to manipulate into adding pretty much anything as long as you were annoying enough. This leaves me with a lot of inconsistent / illogical legacy stuff that I don't agree with, and it also sets a bad precedent that anything can be demanded as platforms. I personally prefer to be more minimalistic in my approach - as I wrote in the thread, many of the choices that are there NOW I would (will) consolidate into others.
As you mentioned, "Wild" tends to be a go-to platform for something that doesn't fit into the current set of platforms - this also gives a misleading approach, and I'll be working on splitting the current "Wild" platform into "Video" and something like "Other". (I will mention this in the thread.)
As far as a platform's representation on Pouet goes, I think size should be an important factor - a platform only really becomes a platform if it has reached a certain level of acceptance outside the creators working on it. There's been demos on microcontrollers and ATMs and all these things which cannot be filed into the current categories, and they're quite popular too, but they rarely get two different groups making demos on the platform, so they continue to feel like personal projects. That doesn't make them platforms. Note that I'm not against TI as a platform (we already have TI-8x as a platform), but I do not want to make a rush judgement and just add everything as platforms.
Right now we're sketching up technical solutions (as seen in the thread) to make a system that granulates better, but it takes time and once you reach ~60000 prods you cannot make bad decisions anymore unless you want to spend the rest of your life trying to fix it. So it'll take time.
> As I mentioned above, impact that Pouet has on what a platform people choose
> for creation their prods is huge. So, if list of platforms doesn't contain a
> lot of computers, many people even have no idea about its existence.
That's entirely conjecture and frankly somewhat disrespectful for the Pouet audience. There are a ton of well-known platforms that exist (and they will continue to do so) without having them listed on Pouet.
> I think that self-made computers (i.e. devices which aren't compatible with
> existing ones and produced in small number of instances) should be
> categorized as "self-made"(or "DIY").
> Computers that officially released (almost any computer produced before,
> e.g. 1995) should be added to the list easily (by request of any Pouet user
> who can supply a link to at least one demoscene prod or like that).
No. Pouet is a user-driven site but administrative oversight exists to keep things within reason. One prod created by one person does not create a platform, and "official" releases are just another ground for arguments about what's "official" (see the ZX flamewar). Overgranulation not only spreads but also makes it the database overly fragmented for the users.
> I've mentioned TI-99/4a and Magnavox Odyssey 2/Videopac just because I know
> that there are demoscene prods released and I'm coding for both platforms :)
At this point I think a baseline of, say, 5-10 prods from at least 2-3 different groups should be grounds for an inclusion discussion. Without that I don't see a reason to add a new platform.