Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[WIP] Game support page #282

Draft
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: dev
Choose a base branch
from
Draft

Conversation

ashquarky
Copy link
Member

A new page showing the supported games and whether they're online, tester-only or offline. I'm half-asleep writing this so I know the code isn't great, but we really need to put this information up somewhere for people to reference. Game info is just hard-coded into the server for now, we can make a big fancy API like the Progress page some other day. I don't expect we'd list every unsupported game, just the ones people ask about.

This PR is incomplete:

  • Not every game is added
  • It's not hooked into the navigation bars or anything

Posting early in case a fundamental overhaul is needed and to make sure this direction is sensible.

@ashquarky ashquarky changed the base branch from master to dev April 19, 2024 02:00
@jonbarrow
Copy link
Member

jonbarrow commented Apr 19, 2024

A new page showing the supported games

This would be the progress page, it's what it's designed for. To show the list of supported games and what features are/are not implemented in them. I think having status pages and such is a good idea but why duplicate this information across multiple pages?

Posting early in case a fundamental overhaul is needed and to make sure this direction is sensible.

I've brought up the idea of overhauling the progress page in general with @hauntii and @gitlimes a while ago. Mostly with a focus on cleaning it up (like limiting the number of fields shown in each entry to avoid huge cards, and giving each title it's own dedicated page with all the details)

Maybe the information you want to display can be worked into that at the same time?

@ashquarky
Copy link
Member Author

The progress page shows the state of our code, but not the live servers - what's public, what's tester-only, what's unavailable, and eventually with the addition of an API what's offline for maintenance or what's crashed. More of a server status page than anything?

We could definitely integrate that information into progress though, maybe with little badges over the game or something.

@jonbarrow
Copy link
Member

The progress page shows the state of our code, but not the live servers

The state of our code is what is live in our servers. As things get implemented, they get deployed, so it's the same thing. In fact that's the whole purpose of the progress page. It wasn't made with "this is what our code is up to" in mind, it was made with "here's a general list of features you can and cannot do in games" in mind

what's public, what's tester-only, what's unavailable

If a feature is unavailable it's marked as such already. If a game is unavailable it just doesn't have a card. That already seems pretty straight forward?

As for the public vs testing stuff, I've mentioned this in other issues/PRs/on Discord but the reason why there's no list of public vs beta games is because the status of a server can, and does, change at any time. So trying to maintain a list like that would be annoying at best

what's offline for maintenance or what's crashed. More of a server status page than anything?

This sounds like a slightly different issue than originally proposed. "Supported games" is already covered by the progress page, but "server status" is not and I do agree it should probably have it's own page. Kinda like how we have https://stats.uptimerobot.com/R7E4wiGjJq/ though this seems outdated and busted

We could definitely integrate that information into progress though, maybe with little badges over the game or something

If there's overlap in the information/scope then we should probably think about consolidating it yeah. Like I said the progress page is due for an overhaul to begin with so now might be a good time to do that? Kill 2 birds with one stone here? @hauntii @gitlimes what do y'all think?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants