On 12/28/2011 11:24 PM, David Mertens wrote:
Chris, all -
I have mixed feelings about delaying the release of 2.4.10. Ultimately,
delaying the release in order to improve the book is a good idea, and so I
think it should be delayed, but here is why I have mixed feelings about it.
I refrained from announcing PDL::Graphics::Prima until I felt like I had
something viable, and now development of PDL::Graphics::Gnuplot has taken
off. I'm still kicking myself for not announcing my work sooner, and the
competitive part of me is a bit jealous of some of the enthusiasm around
P::G::Gnuplot. However, I have put PDL::PP documentation ahead of
P::G::Prima an I have *tons* to write still about PDL::PP, so delaying
2.4.10 until late January means I will (voluntarily) delay work on
P::G::Prima until late January. That's fine, it'll just make my ego a teeny
bit smaller. (It also means I will not begin working on PDL::Expt, unless
we decide we want to have that released concurrently with 2.4.10.)
For me, documentation writing goes hand-in-hand with finding weird
interface issues, and occasionally, bugs. I've come across a few things
that I'd like to change in PDL::PP ASAP. If we don't release 2.4.10 until
late January, can I include those (relatively simple but still nontrivial)
fixes, or are we only to commit documentation changes? If not, can we start
a "bleed" or "dev" branch alongside a "release" branch in the repo so that
development can continue when I feel the need to fix it? There are a couple
of items that I've highlighted in my PDL::PP documentation as things to
avoid, and if I could work on these fixes, I could trim down some of those
warnings (or at least say "It'll be fixed in 2.4.11" knowing it's true
because the fix is in bleed). Also, if we are allowing for code changes
it's only fair to add PDL::Graphics::Gnuplot if it's ready, regardless of
what that does for me ego. :-)
So, the first one is a gripe, but the second one has some decently
important questions worth answering before we finalize on this decision.
Thoughts about what we will allow in 2.4.10 if we push it back?
My plan was to branch the RCx after the 1st so that
development can continue on the master branch. I
wasn't planning to hold up forward progress for PDL.
However, I know how tricky it can be making non-trivial
changes just before a release.
Does that seem reasonable to you?
--Chris
David
On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 9:43 AM, chm<[email protected]> wrote:
All-
I propose holding the final PDL-2.4.10 release
until the end of Jan 2012 to allow the book to
catch up for simultaneous release.
The PDL RC1 appears to be testing well and we're
waiting for any further test reports or other
feedback before releasing RC2, likely a few more
weeks with holidays and all.
By holding just a bit longer, the availability
of the new book alongside the official release
will make for a much more polished and useful
PDL-2.4.10.
With the release candidates already available as
CPAN testers releases, no users will be harmed
by this delay. I, for one, would like to have
time to write my own contributions which were
planned but delayed by the final PDL release
edits.
Thoughts?
Chris
______________________________**_________________
PDL-porters mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.jach.hawaii.**edu/mailman/listinfo/pdl-**porters<http://mailman.jach.hawaii.edu/mailman/listinfo/pdl-porters>
_______________________________________________
Perldl mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.jach.hawaii.edu/mailman/listinfo/perldl
