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

Re: [Sc-devel] 3.3



On Feb 21, 2008, at 4:03 PM, ronald kuivila wrote:

Hi Josh and Dan,

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

Of course... this isn't what I intended to imply :)

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.

I think that is a great idea...

Josh

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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

******************************************
/* 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
*/