[Bf-committers] Official announcement on Siggraph?
Michael Fox
mfoxdogg at gmail.com
Fri Jul 31 00:53:39 CEST 2009
I'd say release an official public beta/alpha and release a special
bugtracker. my biggest concern is documentation on all these new
features especially on the python and nla fronts
Campbell Barton wrote:
> My main concern is we release without properly reviewing the operator
> and RNA names and methods of access.
> This is not just a problem for devs if or extension authors if users
> define their own macros.
>
> Existing inconsistencies...
> - use_foo, enable_foo
> - x_foo, foo_x, foox, xfoo
> - How do we manage toggle/get/set's with operators? - currently
> inconsistent and undefined.
>
> My preference is to call it a preview release, noting that the API's
> are not guaranteed to be stable. (even though many wont change)
>
> Id like to avoid releasing too early and then having to keep users
> happy by keeping half baked api's and then have to make improvements
> that coexist with existing attributes/operators/functions.
>
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 3:11 PM, Amos Manneschmidt<amoose136 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> *If* the contents of the beginning of this this
>> video<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qauryHKIL_U>(I have not verified
>> its contents but I don't see why the author would lie)
>> are true, it means if blender reaches 3.0 it is either perfect or its
>> development has been discontinued. That said, I believe Ton was talking
>> about Siggraph 2.5 specs and release dates, not release numbers.
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 5:25 PM, Nicholas Bishop
>> <nicholasbishop at gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Let's not turn this into another bikeshed discussion on the best
>>> release number to use, that's not really what Ton's posts were about
>>> :)
>>>
>>> -Nicholas
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 10:49 AM, Christopher
>>> Cherrett<stuff at trackingsolutions.ca> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I agree on the 3.0 naming jump.
>>>>
>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>> Subject: Re: [Bf-committers] Official announcement on Siggraph?
>>>> From: Keir Mierle <mierle at gmail.com>
>>>> To: bf-blender developers <bf-committers at blender.org>
>>>> Cc: bf-taskforce25 at blender.org
>>>> Date: 07/30/09 14:05
>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 11:33 AM, Shaul Kedem <shaul.kedem at gmail.com>
>>>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think GSR is correct. calling it 2.5 and not 3.0 is a good step + a
>>>>>> soft launch with lots of "Beta" and RCs in there will be very good as
>>>>>> well,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> +1 on a longish public beta period to reduce expectations of perfection.
>>>>>
>>>>> -1 on naming it 2.5.
>>>>>
>>>>> If any release of Blender (in the past or likely in the future) warrants
>>>>>
>>> a
>>>
>>>>> bump to 3.0, this is it. It's a complete rewrite with some parts ported
>>>>> forward. Maybe there should be a 2.99 release that emphasizes beta
>>>>>
>>> quality,
>>>
>>>>> followed by a polished 3.0 release.
>>>>>
>>>>> Keir
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> So the press release should be in the lines of "a sneak peek", "work
>>>>>> in progress preview", "Thought we might ask for tips...", "You can
>>>>>> change blender !!", "The best is going to become much better very
>>>>>> soon" etc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 2:28 PM, GSR<gsr.b3d at infernal-iceberg.com>
>>>>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>> ton at blender.org (2009-07-30 at 1333.27 +0200):
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You know, the press loves good statements, and at the Siggraph
>>>>>>>>
>>> exhibit
>>>
>>>>>>>> we'll have a lot of good attention. We will print nice 'spec sheets'
>>>>>>>> for Blender 2.5, and spread an official press release too.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "The first release of the 2.5x series is expected to be available in
>>>>>>>> october 2009."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sounds like a plan? Serious objections should be posted quick, we
>>>>>>>>
>>> will
>>>
>>>>>>>> make our sheets and press releases sunday, in New Orleans.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You should make sure a 2.50 does not end in similar way than KDE 4.0
>>>>>>> up to 4.2 (and some would say 4.2 included, as things have not reached
>>>>>>> the same level of 3.5.x in some areas).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> To put it in few words: do not give the impression that it is a final
>>>>>>> product and will replace previous versions at launch day.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In KDE case, people found out the thing wass not user ready, but was
>>>>>>> more "for core developers" even if that big four and zero looked
>>>>>>> pretty inviting for everyone, and then "developers in general" and
>>>>>>> next "bleeding edge users" to the point that some that want "to get
>>>>>>> work done" are staying with KDE 3.5. So they seem to have crawled with
>>>>>>> a nasty storm around, with users complaining about bugs and missing
>>>>>>> features, instead of getting the same path covered but with better
>>>>>>> feelings for everyone.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sorry if that sounds like a party pooper, but learning from others'
>>>>>>> experiences is a good thing. There are plenty of other rocks were to
>>>>>>> stumble upon.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> GSR
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Bf-committers mailing list
>>>>>>> Bf-committers at blender.org
>>>>>>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Bf-committers mailing list
>>>>>> Bf-committers at blender.org
>>>>>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Bf-committers mailing list
>>>>> Bf-committers at blender.org
>>>>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Bf-committers mailing list
>>>> Bf-committers at blender.org
>>>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>>>>
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Bf-committers mailing list
>>> Bf-committers at blender.org
>>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bf-committers mailing list
>> Bf-committers at blender.org
>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
More information about the Bf-committers
mailing list