On Aug 15, 10:26 am, Richard Thomas <[email protected]> wrote: > * We don't have a development culture, disucssion of code review is > rather premature. Pyglet has presumably not had code review so far... Because it had only two developers really, which where both on the same page.
> * Any implementation of any aspect of project management should be > informed by usage and experience in the context in which that > implementation will take place. We don't know how many active > developers we'll have, what kind of discussion dynamic will go on, > whether anyone will partake of an active review process, how much Alex > and Richard are going to be involved from this point on. > * Finally, not that you should really care for my opinion but I'm > rather disappointed by your comparison of what's happening to a train > wreck. Pyglet development had stagnated for a long while and this is > an opportunity to revitalise it. While I'm sure your intentions are as > good as mine in that regard it seems doubtful that I can see eye to > eye with you on this issue. I argue that there might be a need to structure development. Mercurial can fill that role if needed, otherwise it stays out of your way. SVN is incapable of giving you the flexibiity should the need arise. Sticking to SVN guarantees that non-comitters will not contribute and that you're holding back any sort of social/structure development beyond SVN capabilities. It is thus so dissapointing to see you and your ilk, who presumably cares about the project, become its greatest hindrance. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
