[GEM-dev] release date
Cyrille Henry
cyrille.henry at la-kitchen.fr
Tue Nov 18 20:17:03 CET 2003
chris clepper wrote:
> The critical thing I see right now is making sure there is as much
> documentation in the release as possible. At the very least, every
> object should have a help file that lists all of the (working) features
> of the object. Here's a list of objects I don't have help for:
>
> - curve3d
> - camera
> - pix_dv
>
their is a curve3d.pd patch in the usual place :
http://drpichon.free.fr/pure-data/GEM/curve3D/
that can be a good start for the help of this object...
does a standart for gem help file exist?
sould I remove the gemwin in the help file or not?
should I make some more changes?
cyrille
> I can also add my beginner tutorial to CVS, although it does contain
> images which would add a few hundred KB to the distribution.
>
> Bug fixes/enhancements:
>
> - pix_biquad does next to nothing now. The coefficients seem to
> determine how fast the image fades to black. I reverted two versions
> and it worked as it always has. Any ideas what's going on?
>
> - pix_write gave me some serious trouble last night. if i didn't give
> it a 'file ' message it overwrote the pd binary!! that's some really
> bad news, and i've gone through 3 versions of pd in the last 24 hours.
> i'm not sure what's going on but the default setup no longer writes
> 'gem000x.tif' in pd/bin for some reason.
>
> - i mixed up versions of pix_filmDarwin/YUV and need to get them sorted
> out.
>
> - i will probably add some more Altivec code.
>
> We need to decide where the binary distributions will reside.
> Sourceforge project page? IEM? Both? Somewhere else? Someone needs
> to build a version for OSX and a version for Windows by this weekend so
> we can check them on a few machines and be somewhat sure nothing is
> terribly wrong with them. A few changes and tweaks will probably be
> needed but there should be enough time to do them.
>
> I think we should also plan on another point release by the beginning of
> next year to address problems with 0.888 (will it be 0.889 or 0.89?).
> Assuming we don't horribly fuck up 0.888 there won't be a huge rush for
> these fixes. I really want to put an end to getting bug reports on
> versions that are years out of date or come from some unknown origin.
>
> Further down the road, 0.90 could be a major release incorporating large
> changes and additions like my vertex-array objects and shader support.
> I cannot reasonably estimate a time frame for that, although I am
> working towards making significant progress on the vertex stuff by
> year's end, and will commit code to CVS by then.
>
> That's all I can think of right now.
>
> cgc
>
> _______________________________________________
> GEM-dev mailing list
> GEM-dev at iem.at
> http://iem.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gem-dev
>
More information about the GEM-dev
mailing list