On Tuesday 22 August 2006 16:38, Greg Ewing wrote:
> There's nothing wrong with pursuing pygame-ctypes, but
> I think it should be a different package with a different
> name for the time being. It shouldn't be called 'pygame'
> until it can function as a drop-in replacement in all
> respects, including performance and range of supported
> platforms.
I think the point René is trying to make is that pygame-ctypes will *never*
replace what we currently know as pygame, even if it matches and/or exceeds
functionality, performance and range of supported platforms.
So, to keep things moving along I guess what we need is a new name for
pygame-ctypes. We can either:
1. avoid all reference to "pygame" -- "pysdl", "buffy", some random Monty
Python reference, etc
2. stick with referring to "pygame" -- "pygame-ctypes" is long, and isn't
importable, so how about "pygame2", "pygametng", "pygameb5" (b5 was
a better series ;), "pygamect" or something?
Richard
