On 14/08/2009, at 5:30 PM, Nicolas Rougier wrote:
> I agree with Florian and I think that giving full SVN access to
> anybody might make things a real mess in a short period of time. We
> need some sort of roadmap and identify priorities (bug fix, adding
> feature, doc, ...). I think Alex made a fantastic job with the pyglet
> abstraction and I would be happy to code for pyglet under his
> direction. Also, there is already a lot of contribution that could
> make it into pyglet (gletools, simplui/kytten, ...).
Alex and I believe that pyglet should not grow in scope (actually,
Alex would argue that pyglet covers too much scope right now). It
should be a solid core on which those 3rd party libraries may be
developed. See the design document link that Alex posted in his
email[1].
To that end the open SVN access isn't really that great a problem:
there should always be a tight rein on any sort of feature creep and
definitely an eye for backwards compatibility in any commit.
Let's see how we go with contributors using SVN before we jump off on
any DVCS tangent.
Richard
[1] http://code.google.com/p/pyglet/source/browse/trunk/DESIGN?spec=svn19&r=19
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"pyglet-users" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/pyglet-users?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
