Adds status bar

[jasonmash]

Closes #49

[Brookke]

This is looking great

[Brookke]

Are we happy to merge this? Joe mentioned about adding a personality meter at some point, I don't know if it should be done now or later?

[jasonmash]

I'll remove the personality meter button for now, so we can get this branch merged, and to avoid holding anything up. We can add the personality meter back later when we're ready to implement it.

[Brookke]

I would leave it there as a placeholder

[jasonmash]

Okay that's fine then. I've not found a good way of testing the user interface yet, there is a JUnit + Robot thingy, but it's not recommended due to unreliability, and from my experience, that type of testing causes more problems than it solves.

[joeShuff]

I don't think we should half arse the job. Leaving something half done is not good at all. I think this is only the start of the status bar. I personally don't like the aesthetic of it (havent seen it since the meeting so it could have changed) but the just solid gray is not at all appealing and I think we should make some sort of asset for that. If you want to merge then feel free, but don't close this branch, so we can continue work on it.

With regards to worrying about holding anything back, you won't be, at all. We need to stop worrying about time constraints and making it effect the amount of effort we are putting into this. I'd rather have 50% of the features implemented perfectly and looking amazing than 100% half arsed. Remember the Implementation Report we can say why we don't have a feature and explain ourselves.

[Brookke]

100% not fully implemented would probably get us more marks, remember this is the first stage of the game and other groups need room to improve it.

[joeShuff]

We have the time to do that. As I have said, we will get it done. But constantly changing what we're working on will not get anything done. Work on something until it is complete. If help is needed, help will be given. We're learning about software engineering, encountering and solving problems is a huge part of it. Not discovering them and giving up.

[Brookke]

We haven't ran into any problems with this have we? It's just been decided that for now the structure we have is exactly what is needed and can be changed very easily with a few variable changes l

[jasonmash]

Okay that's fine @joeShuff. What would you like me to change?

[joeShuff]

There isn't a problem, but it seems like we're giving up working on this due to time restraints we seem to have put on ourselves. There are 6 of us, and what we need to implement is minimal in comparison.

[Brookke]

@joeShuff this isn't going to get us any marks for implementation its not required, the requirements clearly state do not implement a scoring system etc. Would it be helpful if @jasonmash were to go help with the speech box with @beno11224 as that is a big task and more important to the game right now as that needs to be 100% working for the game to work at the end of this assessment

[joeShuff]

@jasonmash You can merge what we have now, but don't close the branch. We need to discuss what we want it to look like and what we want it to contain.

[Brookke]

@joeShuff lets leave it open and do the looks of it, however I feel that if we aren't careful we will end up implementing lots of the features and then loose marks because we have done too much.

[joeShuff]

The marks are the last thing on my mind. I guarantee to you that we will get a lot if not all of these marks for implementation. In a real life situation you aren't getting marks. I understand that all you care about are the marks but this is an excellent opportunity to get practice in working on a project with people. Which I'm sure is what the module leaders want.

We wont be inplementing the scoring system, I didn't say that at all. We are doing a GUI, considering we have a GUI report that needs doing.

[joeShuff]

@jasonmash can help @beno11224 with the speech screen. That will be a good idea.

[jasonmash]

Yeah that's what I was planning to do @joeShuff, although I was going to close this branch, and create new branches where necessary, but I'm fine with either option tbh.

I believe there are tasks on GitHub to complete the missing functionality, but if there are any missing, please feel free to add them to the To Do column 😃

Just want to add I'm not giving up, or trying to leave it half finished, I'm trying to prioritise features to make sure we meet the minimum requirements, after which I'm happy to spend as much time as we want on anything else (I'm not trying to be awkward, honest!) I've had to do this with the team where I work, especially because clients often ask for more functionality than what they can afford, so learning how to prioritise and producing the minimum viable product is useful in practice.

[Brookke]

@joeShuff I know this and we will be getting the experience as we go through, but at the end of it the marks are just as important as the experience, the marks are done against the brief how closely we meet it, if we are not careful we wont meet it is all. A lot of development work doesn't look good until the end. The looks come at the end when everything is working.

[Brookke]

Maybe once the speechbox and menu are done then work on this carry on, that way, @jasonmash who has done the most with scene2D so far is free to guide people on both the speechbox and menu. If he is not needed at either one of these then he comes back to this?

[joeShuff]

Yeah Jason working on that will be good. Merge this so it doesn't get too far out of date, but leave the branch open so it doesn't get forgotten.

[Brookke]

@joeShuff okay :)