On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 8:55 AM, Tartley <[email protected]> wrote:
> > +1. I like pyglet because it doesn't try to be a PyGame - while that > is a worthy endeavour, it's not what I'm looking for here. > +1 for trimming pyglet down, rather than adding features. I would personally like to see pyglet.graphics, pyglet.font and pyglet.text broken out into their own library - they are just bloat if you are doing anything fancy with pyglet. > > On Aug 14, 12:47 pm, "Martin O'Leary" <[email protected]> wrote: > > 2009/8/14 Steve Johnson <[email protected]>: > I think a lot of this is > tied up in the question of where the future > > of Pyglet lies. If we're going to be adding heaps of new > > functionality, which Richard and Alex are both against, and which I at > > least have fairly strong reservations about, then yes, we probably > > need a DVCS system. However, if we're considering Pyglet to be roughly > > feature-complete, and only talking about bug fixes and minor > > enhancements, then the current SVN system seems perfectly acceptable. > > > > At the moment, it seems like people have a new toy, and are rushing to > > play with it. Let's sit back, fix the bugs that we've got, and have a > > discussion about where we'd like things to go, development-wise. Then > > we can decide what the appropriate technical solution should be. > > > > Martin > -- Tristam MacDonald http://swiftcoder.wordpress.com/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
