I've entered pyweek for the first time, this time. If we're allowed to use a bugfixed pyglet, I have even *more* motivation heh.
-b On Aug 16, 11:20 am, "Martin O'Leary" <[email protected]> wrote: > 2009/8/16 Bruce Smith <[email protected]>:> * PyWeek participants are an > important part of the community of Pyglet > > users, and due to PyWeek rules, we might want to wait until after it's over > > (September 6th) before making any release, or we'd risk disqualifying Pyglet > > for use in the current PyWeek. (Or it could be that a pure-bugfix release > > would be ok... Richard? The rules require use of libraries that were > > available and fully documented at the start of August, but a submission must > > still work when used with the "latest version" of those libraries -- so > > incompatible changes are certainly a problem.) > > Pure bugfix releases of libraries have been allowed (welcomed!) in > previous Pyweeks after the library deadline. I don't think anyone > would have any problems with a Pyglet 1.1.4 release being used, > assuming such a release happens before Pyweek itself. > > > * It would be possible to have a "stable 1.1.4 release" and an "unstable > > 1.2.0 release" at the same time, or almost the same time. Then some of the > > wider community of users would be helping with the testing of 1.2. So a > > possible timeline would be to make both those releases from svn, then (if > > the decision is made to do so) switch to Hg, then improve 1.2 (and its > > documentation and examples) until it's "stable" and release it as 1.2.1. > > I think the model used previously of successive alpha and beta > releases worked very well. We could have 1.2alpha1, 1.2alpha2, etc, > until we're sure that the API is fixed, then 1.2beta1, 1.2beta2, etc, > until it's (relatively) bug-free, then a full 1.2 release. This could > easily sit beside 1.1.4, and indeed 1.1.5 if such a thing turns out to > be necessary. Hopefully by then 1.2 should be stable enough that the > 1.1 branch can be left behind. > > A change in version control systems could take place at any point in > the above, really, if it's decided that one is necessary. Obviously it > would be helpful if there was a consensus among developers about what > was happening, but that sits hand-in-hand with what I've said > previously about decision-making structures. The important thing in my > view is clarity about what decisions have been made, and unity in > implementing decisions once they have been. > > Martin --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
