Post

Introducing an idea: Feature Scoring, to rate a feature to measure if it should be merged or not. Measuring would be on a CRIS score. Complexity, Reach, Impediment, Stakeholder.

Examples of scoring for each point in CRIS.

Example issue:, just for example: VIM in Godot: Complex, few need it.

Example issue: Interfaces. Important, but technically complex.

An example from a feature request by @reduz.bsky.social himself: Action Area. Not important, undemanded.

Example of symbol refactor: Complexity went from 0.1 to 0.9 by a suggestion to make it easier to implement. This would make it score much higher.

Idea: Have a panel that anonymously judges the scores, for each feature. Submitter can appeal if the feel it is incorrect.

Why do this? What would it fix? Have an objective method for reviewing. Help submitters understand why they get accepted or ignored. Give definitively answers to requests. Project staff from harassment from those who can’t take feedback.

I asked: What about feature requests for things that would create new users of Godot that do not yet exist? The reach may be users who aren’t there yet, the impediment is those users are not there yet at all, and the stakeholder cannot exist as those users are not there yet.

Answer: Yes, but we ran into this with visual scripting. People kept asking for a ‘Blueprint like’ node system, it was built, and then nobody used it, so it was removed again in 4.0 So their experience has been to not just build things that “would add new users”, but instead service existing users.

(Personally I worry this creates an echo chamber that eventually solidifies into concrete barriers where progress isn’t possible because only what currently exists is allowed. Blender had this same issue until they finally relented and did a UX pass that then skyrocketed their userbase)

Do you like money? Government money? Here is a talk about getting better at grant writing, to fund your projects, by @baroness.bsky.social

Disclaimer: It depends. There are always people involved, so no advice guarantees a 100% success rate.

It’s really hard, but getting better at grant writing is very helpful. If you get rejected, try and try again!

Grant money is very well spent money. So please apply, because if you don’t, the money can disappear.

There are many different kinds of funds. Please know who you are pitching to. You need to pitch the right aspect to the right grant. Different grants require different focus. Do not tailor the application to a commission member, but know if they are artistic folks, parts of institutes, etc.

Please follow the grant guidelines. Copy and paste the requirements. Stick to the questions and max page count. Registrations, letters of intent, have them there if necessary. If anything is unclear: Contact the fund! Ask!

Be specific and to the point in few words. Use the 5W & 1H method. Who, what, when, where, why, how. Or record yourself for 2 minutes to nail this down.

Be very realistic about your planning. Do not try and squeeze the project into a time that is too tight. If this is your first time, multiple your budget by 5.

Include market research. Commission members read this. Do rough math to figure this out. Getting an initial idea is fine.

Please don’t pick a fight in your application. Some requirements may be stupid, but everyone’s just trying to get through this. Don’t be a dick for no reason. Instead, think of what could work in your favour!

Don’t submit a prototype. If it looks or feels bad, the commission members are anchored to something that isn’t relevant to the proposal. Only include it if it’s required. Please don’t overpromise either, and don’t jump on a trend. It makes things way more difficult.

Please budget properly. Sweat equity can be good too. Also, raise your rates if it’s realistic!