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

Re: [Sc-devel] 3.3



Hi Josh and Dan,

Yes, there is no reason to make the book obsolete before it's printed....

About a "release editor": probably the way to do this is to have a deadline (December 31, 2008?) and then the editor takes over for a few weeks while
release candidates are floated.

RJK

On Feb 21, 2008, at 6:59 AM, Dan Stowell wrote:

Hi Josh,

You're right that everyone's done really well with 3.2, it's a really
great release in lots of ways (also a lot of the accompanying stuff:
the quarks, swingosc, psycollider, have all reached a really good
point).

One point I'd like to make: 3.3 should be a LONG way off. I think we
can happily live with 3.2 as the official "stable" release, plus the
bleeding-edge svn version, for a while. For example, 3.3 DEFINITELY
shouldn't come out before the book comes out!

Dan


2008/2/21, Josh Parmenter <josh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
Well... since James H. just mentioned 3.3 on the sc-users list, I wanted to bring up something that has been on my mind a bit after the 3.2 gear up.

First of all, I REALLY like the way the RCs went this time, and I think there was a little stress with there being a little more of a hard deadline this time. All the same, I think 3.2 is a VERY impressive release. One thing that I think we (as a group) may do differently for the next point release is elect / appoint someone who is the 'head release dev'. Just someone who we all decide will make decisions that need to be made for the next release (set dates / deadlines, decide what should be fixed, what should wait, and perhaps assign bug fixers). With 3.2, I think much of this fell on Nick and Scott (as editors) as well as Dan. What do the rest of you think about the rest of us electing someone who tries to keep some of these larger picture things in mind? This shouldn't be someone with absolute power... in general, I think the discussions on the dev list are wonderful. But when things can't seem to be decided, it may be good to have a person who decides (for a single release) what needs to be done and how. Kind of like the VP in the US Senate... (oversees things, and really only has executive power in tie breakers for those of you lucky enough not to have Dick Chenew secretly running your country). This idea is NOT to squash conversation or debate,
but to have a voice that can make some decisions to, hopefully, make
everything move a bit smoother and saner.

How do others feel about this?

Best,

Josh (not a Dick Cheney fan... less then a year to go... apologies to those
who love the power the guy wields)




******************************************

/* Joshua D. Parmenter

http://www.realizedsound.net/josh/




"Every composer – at all times and in all cases – gives his own
interpretation of how modern society is structured: whether actively or passively, consciously or unconsciously, he makes choices in this regard. He may be conservative or he may subject himself to continual renewal; or he may strive for a revolutionary, historical or social palingenesis." - Luigi
Nono*/

_______________________________________________
 Sc-devel mailing list
 Sc-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
 http://lists.create.ucsb.edu/mailman/listinfo/sc-devel




--
http://www.mcld.co.uk
_______________________________________________
Sc-devel mailing list
Sc-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.create.ucsb.edu/mailman/listinfo/sc-devel