[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


>First, here's a new, reworked sketch of a new PPlay agenda. It's more
>"lightweight" than the previous ones, with less lofty goals and a more
>pragmatic approach.
I think that's good. Means we can get done faster, boosting the image of
PPlay as a serious thing, instead of just "much talk - no action". And
there's no downside to it; we can always come up with new goals after having
finished these.

>All in all it's no more the "we'll unite all the SDKs" and "we'll create a
>good package of everything" approach but rather a "we try to make it easy
>for game developers to make informed choices" one.
I think "getting it all together" is still a good idea. However, I also do
think that should be kept a bit on the back-burner (is that a word?) for

Ok, so much for the agenda (I thought about letting that topic rest for a
while, but the other things to do are somewhat dependent on it...).
On to the concrete things to do now (the order is somewhat bogus - most of
the tasks overlap):

>(1) Clean up the CVS repository. (which is a real mess now)
I think the way you suggest laying out things is fine.

>(2) Rewrite the build system (which is a little mess now)
I don't know anything about that, so I can't comment.

>(3) Clean up the core PPlay headers (which are rather messy now)
Oh yeah, that reminds me: either each header should only include the
PenguinPlay.h header, -OR- one of the project-specific headers, since all
the project-specific headers also include PenguinPlay.h (atleast
PenguinFile.h does).

That, or IMHO the project-specific headers should not include PenguinFile.h

>(4) Decide on a good versioning scheme (which we don't have at all now)
>Linux-kernel - like should be good :
>V x.y.z where
>x = major version, changing only for really revolutional changes
>y = minor version, changing for major changes in functionality,
>    an odd number meaning developmental code and even meaning stable code
>z = patchlevel
Sounds good to me. So PenguinFile is actually at version 1.0.0 then? Sounds
a bit weird, but 0.0.0 is even... -1.0 is even worse.

>Any vetos?
Not from me :)