[Bf-committers] 2.49 release proposal
ideasman42 at gmail.com
Tue Feb 17 01:21:07 CET 2009
Disagree with all of ya! :)
We should do another 2.4x release because it may take some time for
some users to switch to blender 2.5 (over a year for some Id expect).
Getting the tracker below 50 is a pain especially with 2.5 having so
personally Id be satisfied if a shortlist of bugs from the tracker
were made a target for a 2.48b release,
- Bugs that affect 2.5 or....
- Bugs that have been added since 2.48a and...
* Only bugs that can reproduced *
There are some annoying bugs in 2.48a that have since been fixed
naming some off the top of my head)..
- nurbs crashing in some cases (my bad),
- clicking on a metastrip can segfault the sequencer.
- paste a UTF string segfaults on linux,
- Other game engine bugs fixed that I havnt kept track of.
If this is still "too much" then we could set a deadline to devs to
get their stuff in order and release a 2.48b as long as no horrible
bugs have been added since 2.48a.
On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 4:10 PM, Chris Cherrett
<stuff at trackingsolutions.ca> wrote:
> Agreed with mfox. Push for 2.5
> Michael Fox wrote:
>> personally im against a 2.49 release, sure there are some new stuff but
>> it will be a huge let down for the whole blender community who want 2.5
>> not another 2.4 release.
>> I say still hunt down the bugs so they don't creep into 2.5, and your
>> suggestion for a march-april release is when the most time will be put
>> into 2.5 and it wont be too long after that that 2.5 can be somewhat
>> Not to mention that the documentation for all these new things has not
>> been written and many still very much untested.
>> so i say no 2.49 release but still work towards it as if it would be a
>> release eg, bug hunting
>> On Mon, 2009-02-16 at 13:56 +0100, Ton Roosendaal wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>> It has been popping up in discussions a couple of times... the
>>> suggestion make one final "stable" release for the 2.4x series before
>>> moving to 2.50. That will also allow a more early release of the work
>>> since 2.48.
>>> Another benefit would be that a good 2.49 release might sooth the
>>> migration pains for 2.50 a bit, for example for python API changes...
>>> A clear downside is of course it takes time and energy away from 2.5
>>> work, the current bug tracker is quite loaded! But those should be
>>> tackled anyway.
>>> I've promised to check on the tracker this week, to see how much of
>>> this is generic blender bugs, or stuff that's not relevant for 2.5.
>>> Would be nice if most 2.49 fixes could be migrated over. Will come back
>>> to that later.
>>> Another good strategy to define if we're ready for a release is by
>>> defining release targets, which should be met before a release. Here's
>>> what has been mentioned on last sunday's irc meeting:
>>> Blender 2.49 targets:
>>> - Bug tracker down to reasonable level ( < 50?)
>>> - Dome support for GE
>>> - Texture nodes
>>> - GE python, new logic property API
>>> - New GE actuators
>>> - Video textures (capture support Windows only)
>>> - Projection paint
>>> - Jpeg2000 support in sequencer
>>> - Etch-a-ton (Martin's rigging system)
>>> And we should do of course a splash screen contest!
>>> Timing proposal: check target state weekly, and aim for an march/april
>>> release, provided we're happy with the svn state + have sufficient
>>> backup for making a release, like by the platform maintainers. :)
>>> Feedback welcome!
>>> Ton Roosendaal Blender Foundation ton at blender.org www.blender.org
>>> Blender Institute BV Entrepotdok 57A 1018AD Amsterdam The Netherlands
>>> Bf-committers mailing list
>>> Bf-committers at blender.org
> Bf-committers mailing list
> Bf-committers at blender.org
More information about the Bf-committers