Hi Seems a lot of people are still downloading 0.6.0 and using it - my concern is that people will find it buggy and incomplete and give up on wxruby altogether. I think we''ve got wxruby2 to a point where it''s all round better than the old series, even though it''s not release quality, and we''re missing the DnD classes. So for the next release, I''m wondering if we should drop the -preview tag, and bump the version number so it appears first on the download page. I''m thinking of a release once we''ve finished the wx28 upgrade which is not too far off, merged back and fixed a few of the outstanding bugs if poss. My suggestion would be to call it wxruby 1.9.0 (ie pre 2.0, odd minor = unstable). This is in line with ruby''s version scheme, but I''m open to other systems. cheers alex
> Seems a lot of people are still downloading 0.6.0 and using it - my > concern is that people will find it buggy and incomplete and give up on > wxruby altogether.I tried 0.6.0 way back when and would have given up on wxruby too, because it did not work well for my platform and needs. But I decided to pitch-in instead. I very easily could have gone to QT or Fx. I have not looked into it but can we rename the wxRuby label on the download page so it is no longer at the top?> I think we''ve got wxruby2 to a point where it''s all round better than > the old series, even though it''s not release quality, and we''re missing > the DnD classes.If we release wxruby2 without DnD we will quickly find out how important it is to users. Maybe it is not that big of a deal, in the apps I write I do not use DnD.> So for the next release, I''m wondering if we should drop the -preview > tag, and bump the version number so it appears first on the download > page. I''m thinking of a release once we''ve finished the wx28 upgrade > which is not too far off, merged back and fixed a few of the outstanding > bugs if poss.I''m with you on the wx28, wx26 was good but I am finding wx28 much nicer. I can''t think of a good reason to keep working on wx26.> My suggestion would be to call it wxruby 1.9.0 (ie pre 2.0, odd minor > unstable). This is in line with ruby''s version scheme, but I''m open to > other systems.I still like the wxPython naming scheme, [wxWidgetsVersion].[wxRuby release for this version]. ex. wxRuby 2.8.3.0, wxRuby 2.8.3.1 wxRuby 2.8.3.2 ... wxRuby 2.8.4.x etc. That way users have no doubt on what version of wxWidgets we are targeting. I believe in the past someone said that ruby gems has problems with this naming scheme, I am a bit fuzzy on that. Sean> cheers > alex > _______________________________________________ > Wxruby-development mailing list > Wxruby-development at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/wxruby-development >
Sean Long wrote:> I tried 0.6.0 way back when and would have given up on wxruby too, > because it did not work well for my platform and needs. But I decided > to pitch-in instead. >I''m very glad you did...> I have not looked into it but can we rename the wxRuby label on the > download page so it is no longer at the top? >That''s a neat idea - I''ve renamed it to ''wxRuby old series'' so wxruby2 is at the top now.> If we release wxruby2 without DnD we will quickly find out how > important it is to users. Maybe it is not that big of a deal, in the > apps I write I do not use DnD. >I suppose the other problem is not being able to paste to the system from custom widgets. This is a bit of an issue for me as I''d like to be able to export HTML tables. Guess it''s like any feature - it''s a git if it''s not there. I haven''t given up altogether on DataObject, but have put a lot of time into fixing it without results yet.> I''m with you on the wx28, wx26 was good but I am finding wx28 much > nicer. I can''t think of a good reason to keep working on wx26. >It will be even better when we add the other new features in 2.8 - eg RichTextCtrl and the Picker classes. I don''t think any are very hard to wrap, just a bit laborious making the include file.> I still like the wxPython naming scheme, [wxWidgetsVersion].[wxRuby > release for this version]. > > ex. > > wxRuby 2.8.3.0, > wxRuby 2.8.3.1 > wxRuby 2.8.3.2 > ... > wxRuby 2.8.4.x > etc. > > That way users have no doubt on what version of wxWidgets we are targeting. >I don''t mind this scheme either - there''s nothing to indicate it''s not release quality, so we''d have to keep calling it ''preview''.> I believe in the past someone said that ruby gems has problems with > this naming scheme, I am a bit fuzzy on that.The issue is that rubygems only respects the first three digits of a major.minor.release scheme. So it can''t distinguish 2.8.3.1 from 2.8.3.2 Maybe we could use a scheme like 2.8.x, where x is our release number, targetting the latest release of Wx. alex
> That''s a neat idea - I''ve renamed it to ''wxRuby old series'' so wxruby2 > is at the top now.Nice! I would have tried but I have not messed with the rubyforge interface too much and do not want to totally screw up something.> > I''m with you on the wx28, wx26 was good but I am finding wx28 much > > nicer. I can''t think of a good reason to keep working on wx26. > > > It will be even better when we add the other new features in 2.8 - eg > RichTextCtrl and the Picker classes. I don''t think any are very hard to > wrap, just a bit laborious making the include file.I have not looked at any of those features yet.> > I still like the wxPython naming scheme, [wxWidgetsVersion].[wxRuby > > release for this version]. > > > I don''t mind this scheme either - there''s nothing to indicate it''s not > release quality, so we''d have to keep calling it ''preview''.Or wait until we are out of ''preview'' and switch over to the new naming scheme. Then we only have releases. To preview users will need to use svn.> The issue is that rubygems only respects the first three digits of a > major.minor.release scheme. So it can''t distinguish 2.8.3.1 from 2.8.3.2 > Maybe we could use a scheme like 2.8.x, where x is our release number, > targetting the latest release of Wx.How about doing this: wxRuby 2.8.300 wxRuby 2.8.301 wxRuby 2.8.302 wxRuby 2.8.303 where the last 2 digits are our version number. Sean