State of the release

[Boudewijn Rempt]

On Sunday 26 September 2010, Sven Langkamp wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 5:54 PM, LukasT.dev at gmail.com
> <lukast.dev at gmail.com>wrote:
> 
> > On Friday 24 September 2010 15:50:12 Boudewijn Rempt wrote:
> > > On Friday 24 September 2010, LukasT.dev at gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > Really Big Issues
> > > >
> > > > Let me also add bug issue regarding brush engines preset.
> > > > Enkithan suggested a long ago that we should mark brush engines
> > > > that are experimental (e.g. brush preset format is changing radically
> > > > between versions)
> > > > as experimental and stable as stable (e.g. development of the Pixel
> > brush
> > > > is quite conservative, so that one might be marked as stable)
> > > >
> > > > We are in a string freeze. How do we want to solve this problem?
> > >
> > > I think a short reprieve of the string freeze and changing the name to
> > > curve (experimental) is okay if you do it today.
> >
> > I did not manage to do that on Friday. What about adding one more string
> > called "Experimental" in the Combo box as category and sort the brush
> > engines
> > first according the group (stale before experimental) then according the
> > name?
> >
> > I can schedule this on Tuesday. Maybe ask translators if they allow this?
> > It is huge problem if we don't do this and changing string for every brush
> > engine seems quite more problematic (and long names does not look good
> > in the combo box then)
> >
> > Opinions?
> >
> 
> I think the best way to solve that is to use categories like the composite
> ops. This would require a bit more work, but it doesn't make the combobox
> bigger and only adds one string.
> 

That's more or less what Lukas proposed, right? I agree, it would be nice to have it done this way.


-- 
Boudewijn Rempt | http://www.valdyas.org
Ceterum censeo lapsum particulorum probae delendum esse