> Fabien Costantini wrote:
>
> > That said, yes we should IMHO stop fancy modifications/improvements  and 
> > focus exclusively on bug fixes asap.
>
> I agree in general (priority on fltk 1.3 release), but I still want
> to get some ABI breaking things done before the release of 1.3.
>
> IMHO there are four main things that must be done before a release:
>
>   (1) Get utf-8 support ready. There are still lots of things to do.
>       At least xft issues come to mind. More support for Eastern
>       languages may be postponed, though (IMHO).
Ok, let's specifiy the _minimum_ features to realize before an RC can be 
released then.
- First, the TODO.utf8 file is just a list a files (to be treated?),
 should be rename TODO_FILES.utf8 if it is still necessary?
- Then a real TODO.utf8 should be updated with a full list of the features to 
fix/add
- Then we should establish which are the priority tasks we want to fix in utf8 
for 1.3. (i.e: I doubt it is a good idea to expect adding all langages supports 
in our next release : couldn't it be made progressively after that  ?)


>   (2) Check, which ABI issues should be solved before a FLTK 1.3
>       release. I don't want to imagine how long it will take, until
>       we get the next chance to break the ABI, although I hope that
>       it will not take too long after the first release that we
>       start working on FLTK 1.4 with the next ABI (and maybe also
>       API?) changes.
The point  may be : what if instead of expecting to release 
beautiful-complete-abi-stable-proofed-the-one version, we just target smaller/ 
more manageable/frequent releases (like a new release every year approx.).
Then I guess it won't be so terrible to wait for the next ABI change, wouldn't 
it ?

>
>   (3) Fix bugs.
YES, and the fact that the team is bigger today may help better than before.
>
>   (4) Improve documentation.
Yes, and probably focus on correctness and completeness more than on the aspect 
of the documentation, which still matters though.
>
> This is explicitly not an order of priority, but I think that
> all parts are worth to be considered.
>
> I can help with (2)-(4), but I can't help much with (1).
I can continue to fix UTF8 bugs, but I need a real TODO list to be established 
(see upper) and then priorities for 1.3.

> So I'll focus on (2)-(4), but someone needs to do (1).
> Unfortunately those who did the most work there are
> currently not much available... Others may only do other
> parts, however.
We lived for years with a nice, yet simple html documentation, I think point 4 
is ok for a release, even if it will always be  perfectable.
>
> For me issue (2) seems _very_ important, because there are
> lots of old STR's, maybe already from 2005/06 or even earlier,
> that say "we can't do this for 1.1, because it would break
> the ABI". Now we have 2009, and FLTK 1.4 won't come before
> 2010 or 2011, right? Unfortunately, many of these STR's are
> now classified as 1.4 feature requests, but we should have
> an eye on those, too.
Again, I'd highly suggest here that we (maybe you?) establish a 
TODO-CHANGES.abi asap so that we can have a clear view a determine limits to it.

>
> > We all like adding/improving features, and this is important that each and 
> > every one in the team can find an opportunity to do so ; afterall this is 
> > the least that a coredev deserves as a counterpart for so many everyday 
> > unfair maintanance tasks, but still what should be probably done now is 
> > focusing on a release.
>
> Yes, we need a release soon. But see above. The most important
> point is to get utf-8 ready, then we can look what should be
> done before the release, and what maybe later.
>
> > FLTK2 development history teached us a lesson of humility, IMHO: We should 
> > be happy of all that was already done in 1.3 !
>
> Yes, that's true, we can be glad to have a growing developer
> team :-)
Yes, it's a real chance for us to have these quality people in the team,
still we need to focus more on the _project management_ issue to lead us to 
success.
IMHO What FLTK 1.3 really needs now is a solid manageable and realistic (short 
to mid term) direction ...
And if Matt and Mike are a bit too busy right now, I think we (at least you and 
me and potentially everyone that want to feel responsible for this project in 
team) can do a good job meanwhile in that field ;-)

>
> Albrecht
Fabien

_______________________________________________
fltk-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk-dev

Reply via email to