> I totally agree with this. I am the only one who codes on my
>MUD,
>and although maybe things go a little slower with adding new features
>then
>if we had multi coders, I think overall one coder MUDs are better
>designed
>then Multi-Coder MUDs. Now, this is not true 100%, but in my
>experience,
>it is enough for me not to get another coder.
Although my MUD is not up, I feel that two coders(the implementor of a
MUD and also someone he/she trusts well enough with their code) will be
able to do a good job. I only say this because that way, if the coder is
supplied with their own copy of the source code, any changes they make
can simply be e-mailed to the implementor, for them to put in the "real"
MUD code, and, upon fixing any bugs with it, send the coder the updated
version. This allows the implementor to keep track of what's going into
the MUD, while also lessening the burden on them. Just my two cents,
-Phillip
Phillip Ames | Satisfaction is not guaranteed.
kirk47@juno.com | -Ferengi Rule of Acquisition #19
ICQ: 8778335 | AOL IM: Grathol
http://members.xoom.com/Gowron/index.html(Unfinished)
_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
+------------------------------------------------------------+
| Ensure that you have read the CircleMUD Mailing List FAQ: |
| http://democracy.queensu.ca/~fletcher/Circle/list-faq.html |
+------------------------------------------------------------+
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/15/00 PST