On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 10:32 AM, Tartley <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Hi everybody, > > On Aug 14, 1:11 pm, Ben Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > > .. > > I think what should be done for the immediate future of pyglet is to > > take care of all of the important open issues and get a release out > > without a scope change. While that's going on, we can easily discuss > > longer-term choices > > ... > > I think this idea of an initial minimal release tackling known, open > issues is something we can all agree on. > > The question of whether (and when) to switch to a DVCS seems to be one > that people differ on. > > I wouldn't normally suggest a poll, but in this case I think that the > pros and cons of each case are already clear to everyone, and > whichever decision we make will work just fine. Therefore it's more > important to make the decision in a way that keeps the most people > happy and engaged, then we can move on. > > Does a poll seem productive? Or is more chat required to assess the > merits of using or not-using a DVCS? As far as I can tell, everyone is in favour of a move to mercurial - the open question seems to be 'when'. I would advocate we wait until the minimal release is complete, as transitioning to a DVCS in the middle of bug fixing is going to be disruptive. Once that minimal release is out of the way, mercurial would certainly help streamline the development process for the forward branch. -- 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
