Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Production 5.6 release next week

Expand Messages
  • merton_monk
    The subject says it all. :) I think it s pretty much ready, but I ll be largely afk until monday. -Bryan
    Message 1 of 14 , Jan 2, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      The subject says it all. :)

      I think it's pretty much ready, but I'll be largely afk until monday.

      -Bryan
    • Stewart Larsen
      Man, I was kinda hoping we could get some sort of new feature lockdown and get the rsrd stuff completely correct completely correct for a beta or two before
      Message 2 of 14 , Jan 2, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        Man, I was kinda hoping we could get some sort of "new feature
        lockdown" and get the rsrd stuff completely correct completely correct
        for a beta or two before we released the next production release.

        There are still a number of small bugs that are just annoying. Ihave
        had to create templates and modify the LST files for every character my
        fiance and I play, just to get their numbers correct. Improved grapple
        was not implemented correctly (actually did nothing in the lst file).
        Weapon finesse still didn't work in 5.5.5, etc...

        I think we should take some time to fix everything before we release
        another broken production release.

        Stew

        On Fri, 2004-01-02 at 09:54, merton_monk wrote:
        > The subject says it all. :)
        >
        > I think it's pretty much ready, but I'll be largely afk until monday.
        >
        > -Bryan
        >
        >
        > PCGen's release site: http://pcgen.sourceforge.net
        > PCGen's alpha build: http://rpg.plambert.net/pcgen
        > PCGen's FAQ:
        > http://rpg.plambert.net/pcgen/current/_docs/
        >
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        > To visit your group on the web, go to:
        > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pcgen/
        >
        > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        > pcgen-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        >
        > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
        > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        >
      • merton_monk
        ... correct ... Ihave ... character my ... grapple ... file). ... The RSRD issues are the main emphasis behind the working going into the 5.6 release. Most of
        Message 3 of 14 , Jan 2, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In pcgen@yahoogroups.com, Stewart Larsen <stl19847@y...> wrote:
          > Man, I was kinda hoping we could get some sort of "new feature
          > lockdown" and get the rsrd stuff completely correct completely
          correct
          > for a beta or two before we released the next production release.
          >
          > There are still a number of small bugs that are just annoying.
          Ihave
          > had to create templates and modify the LST files for every
          character my
          > fiance and I play, just to get their numbers correct. Improved
          grapple
          > was not implemented correctly (actually did nothing in the lst
          file).
          > Weapon finesse still didn't work in 5.5.5, etc...
          >
          > I think we should take some time to fix everything before we release
          > another broken production release.
          >
          > Stew

          The RSRD issues are the main emphasis behind the working going into
          the 5.6 release. Most of the issues identified are data in nature,
          and Doug and his crew are hitting those. As additional RSRD issues
          come up, either code or data, we'll fold them in to patches for 5.6.
          All work for 5.6 is being done on a branch, so work being done on the
          main line won't impact it (this helps greatly minimize the chance of
          collateral damage). For any production release for something like
          PCGen that's a living evolving application there is always the desire
          to 'wait just a little bit longer' to 'get things right'. However,
          for everyone the bar to determine what 'just right' is varies - so
          you could end up waiting a long long time. Open Source has a
          mantra 'release early, release often'. By getting a production
          release out as soon as it meets some internal sanity checks, we get a
          much larger audience to download it. They give us feedback, and we
          go from there. Most users download a production release, a smaller
          pool will download the betas, so the amount of feedback we get from
          the betas is somewhat lessened from what we get from production
          releases. So our desire for feedback and getting a release out the
          door is tempered by wanting to make sure that we don't release
          something isn't ready for prime-time. Our egos are at stake as a
          team, so we don't want to release anything that will make you think
          we have no idea what we're doing. It's all about trade-offs. :)

          All that said, it sounds like the data team has the remaining RSRD
          issues well in hand, so I'm confident that 5.6 will be a milestone in
          3.5e support.

          -Bryan
        • Hugh Foster
          ... From what I see on this list, I beg to differ; most people seem to use the best (newest) they can get. I m a bit conservative and even I m on 5.5.3. Will
          Message 4 of 14 , Jan 2, 2004
          • 0 Attachment
            I agree with most of this, however point of order:

            > Most users download a production release, a smaller pool will
            > download the betas, so the amount of feedback we get from the betas
            > is somewhat lessened from what we get from production releases.

            From what I see on this list, I beg to differ; most people seem to use
            the best (newest) they can get. I'm a bit conservative and even I'm on
            5.5.3.

            Will the CMP epic pack come out at the same time (and please other
            peeps don't tell me to sod off and ask this on CMP's fora because I
            have been, regularly, and no-one answers me anymore, not even to say
            "um")!


            --

            Hugh Foster
            hugh@...
            http://www.ace-dog.com
            I like you, but I wouldn't want to see you working with subatomic particles.


            02/01/2004 8:33:07 PM
          • merton_monk
            ... betas ... use ... on ... I think you d be surprised if you followed the stats on our downloads - the production releases far outpace the betas in terms of
            Message 5 of 14 , Jan 2, 2004
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In pcgen@yahoogroups.com, Hugh Foster <hugh@a...> wrote:
              > I agree with most of this, however point of order:
              >
              > > Most users download a production release, a smaller pool will
              > > download the betas, so the amount of feedback we get from the
              betas
              > > is somewhat lessened from what we get from production releases.
              >
              > From what I see on this list, I beg to differ; most people seem to
              use
              > the best (newest) they can get. I'm a bit conservative and even I'm
              on
              > 5.5.3.

              I think you'd be surprised if you followed the stats on our
              downloads - the production releases far outpace the betas in terms of
              downloads. This particular list will tend to focus on the betas,
              because people here are, more often than not, involved with bug
              hunting and/or offering suggestions for improvements, which means
              that this particular group is most interested in the latest and
              greatest.

              >
              > Will the CMP epic pack come out at the same time (and please other
              > peeps don't tell me to sod off and ask this on CMP's fora because I
              > have been, regularly, and no-one answers me anymore, not even to say
              > "um")!

              *putting CMP hat on*
              I'm not directly involved with the data, although I've sent an email
              to the parties who are responsible for the epic data so they can
              answer your question. I'll get you a definite response as quickly as
              I can (I'll be on the road shortly, so that may not be until next
              week).

              -Bryan

              >
              >
              > --
              >
              > Hugh Foster
              > hugh@a...
              > http://www.ace-dog.com
              > I like you, but I wouldn't want to see you working with subatomic
              particles.
              >
              >
              > 02/01/2004 8:33:07 PM
            • Frugal
              ... So does that mean we can put unstable code for 5.7 on the head branch at the moment?.. -- regards, Frugal -OS Chimp
              Message 6 of 14 , Jan 2, 2004
              • 0 Attachment
                <quote who="merton_monk">
                > All work for 5.6 is being done on a branch, so work being done on the
                > main line won't impact it (this helps greatly minimize the chance of
                > collateral damage).

                So does that mean we can put unstable code for 5.7 on the head branch at
                the moment?..

                --
                regards,
                Frugal
                -OS Chimp
              • Hugh Foster
                ... Cheers dude. :) -- Hugh Foster hugh@ace-dog.com http://www.ace-dog.com I like you, but I wouldn t want to see you working with subatomic particles.
                Message 7 of 14 , Jan 2, 2004
                • 0 Attachment
                  > *putting CMP hat on* I'm not directly involved with the data,
                  > although I've sent an email to the parties who are responsible for
                  > the epic data so they can answer your question. I'll get you a
                  > definite response as quickly as I can (I'll be on the road shortly,
                  > so that may not be until next week).

                  Cheers dude. :)


                  --

                  Hugh Foster
                  hugh@...
                  http://www.ace-dog.com
                  I like you, but I wouldn't want to see you working with subatomic particles.


                  02/01/2004 10:12:27 PM
                • Barak
                  Well, I think that whatever the problem is with psionic powers/spells not showing up for selection needs to be fixed before we release 5.6. That s a major
                  Message 8 of 14 , Jan 4, 2004
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Well, I think that whatever the problem is with psionic powers/spells not
                    showing up for selection needs to be fixed before we release 5.6. That's a
                    major breakage from 5.4 that's been about for a while now.

                    I just built and tested (from the main branch)and it still doesn't work, so
                    I doubt it will work in the 5.6 branch either...

                    Barak
                    ~PCGen BoD
                    ~OS Silverback


                    > -----Original Message-----
                    > From: merton_monk [mailto:merton_monk@...]

                    > I think you'd be surprised if you followed the stats on our
                    > downloads - the production releases far outpace the betas in terms of
                    > downloads. This particular list will tend to focus on the betas,
                    > because people here are, more often than not, involved with bug
                    > hunting and/or offering suggestions for improvements, which means
                    > that this particular group is most interested in the latest and
                    > greatest.
                  • merton_monk
                    ... powers/spells not ... That s a ... work, so ... Yup - this definitely needs to be fixed before 5.6 goes out the door. -Bryan ... terms of ... means
                    Message 9 of 14 , Jan 4, 2004
                    • 0 Attachment
                      --- In pcgen@yahoogroups.com, "Barak" <barak@v...> wrote:
                      > Well, I think that whatever the problem is with psionic
                      powers/spells not
                      > showing up for selection needs to be fixed before we release 5.6.
                      That's a
                      > major breakage from 5.4 that's been about for a while now.
                      >
                      > I just built and tested (from the main branch)and it still doesn't
                      work, so
                      > I doubt it will work in the 5.6 branch either...

                      Yup - this definitely needs to be fixed before 5.6 goes out the door.

                      -Bryan

                      >
                      > Barak
                      > ~PCGen BoD
                      > ~OS Silverback
                      >
                      >
                      > > -----Original Message-----
                      > > From: merton_monk [mailto:merton_monk@y...]
                      >
                      > > I think you'd be surprised if you followed the stats on our
                      > > downloads - the production releases far outpace the betas in
                      terms of
                      > > downloads. This particular list will tend to focus on the betas,
                      > > because people here are, more often than not, involved with bug
                      > > hunting and/or offering suggestions for improvements, which
                      means
                      > > that this particular group is most interested in the latest and
                      > > greatest.
                    • Ross
                      ... There s a P9 bug at SF on this, #865506. I started looking into it but didn t get very far as my wife needed the PC to do actual work. :-( I posted what
                      Message 10 of 14 , Jan 5, 2004
                      • 0 Attachment
                        > Yup - this definitely needs to be fixed before 5.6 goes out the door.
                        >
                        > -Bryan

                        There's a P9 bug at SF on this, #865506. I started looking into it but didn't get very far as my wife needed the PC to do actual work. :-( I posted what I found to the bug -- someone who knows the spells better than I do should probably look at it.

                        Ross
                        GMGen Whatsit
                      • Sigurdur H. Olafsson
                        Regarding 5.6 Is it still on schedule for this week? I cannot see that any of the imperative RSRD data trackers have been closed as fixed. (We are talking 30+
                        Message 11 of 14 , Jan 7, 2004
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Regarding 5.6
                          Is it still on schedule for this week?
                          I cannot see that any of the imperative RSRD data trackers have been
                          closed as fixed. (We are talking 30+ Priority 9 trackers here)
                          Wouldn´t it be a good idea to release a beta this week, and push for
                          data fixes for next week?


                          --- In pcgen@yahoogroups.com, "merton_monk" <merton_monk@y...> wrote:
                          > --- In pcgen@yahoogroups.com, Stewart Larsen <stl19847@y...> wrote:
                          > > Man, I was kinda hoping we could get some sort of "new feature
                          > > lockdown" and get the rsrd stuff completely correct completely
                          > correct
                          > > for a beta or two before we released the next production release.
                          > >
                          > > There are still a number of small bugs that are just annoying.
                          > Ihave
                          > > had to create templates and modify the LST files for every
                          > character my
                          > > fiance and I play, just to get their numbers correct. Improved
                          > grapple
                          > > was not implemented correctly (actually did nothing in the lst
                          > file).
                          > > Weapon finesse still didn't work in 5.5.5, etc...
                          > >
                          > > I think we should take some time to fix everything before we
                          release
                          > > another broken production release.
                          > >
                          > > Stew
                          >
                          > The RSRD issues are the main emphasis behind the working going into
                          > the 5.6 release. Most of the issues identified are data in nature,
                          > and Doug and his crew are hitting those. As additional RSRD issues
                          > come up, either code or data, we'll fold them in to patches for
                          5.6.
                          > All work for 5.6 is being done on a branch, so work being done on
                          the
                          > main line won't impact it (this helps greatly minimize the chance
                          of
                          > collateral damage). For any production release for something like
                          > PCGen that's a living evolving application there is always the
                          desire
                          > to 'wait just a little bit longer' to 'get things right'. However,
                          > for everyone the bar to determine what 'just right' is varies - so
                          > you could end up waiting a long long time. Open Source has a
                          > mantra 'release early, release often'. By getting a production
                          > release out as soon as it meets some internal sanity checks, we get
                          a
                          > much larger audience to download it. They give us feedback, and we
                          > go from there. Most users download a production release, a smaller
                          > pool will download the betas, so the amount of feedback we get from
                          > the betas is somewhat lessened from what we get from production
                          > releases. So our desire for feedback and getting a release out the
                          > door is tempered by wanting to make sure that we don't release
                          > something isn't ready for prime-time. Our egos are at stake as a
                          > team, so we don't want to release anything that will make you think
                          > we have no idea what we're doing. It's all about trade-offs. :)
                          >
                          > All that said, it sounds like the data team has the remaining RSRD
                          > issues well in hand, so I'm confident that 5.6 will be a milestone
                          in
                          > 3.5e support.
                          >
                          > -Bryan
                        • merton_monk
                          ... been ... for ... We re discussing that - 5.6 looks like it will have to be delayed, probably until next week. I hadn t thought about releasing another
                          Message 12 of 14 , Jan 7, 2004
                          • 0 Attachment
                            --- In pcgen@yahoogroups.com, "Sigurdur H. Olafsson" <here@h...>
                            wrote:
                            > Regarding 5.6
                            > Is it still on schedule for this week?
                            > I cannot see that any of the imperative RSRD data trackers have
                            been
                            > closed as fixed. (We are talking 30+ Priority 9 trackers here)
                            > Wouldn´t it be a good idea to release a beta this week, and push
                            for
                            > data fixes for next week?

                            We're discussing that - 5.6 looks like it will have to be delayed,
                            probably until next week. I hadn't thought about releasing another
                            beta this week, but that's a good idea. The issue is that we now have
                            2 branches of code, one for the 5.6 release and one for what was
                            intended to be the 5.7.1 release. I could go ahead and release off
                            the 5.6 branch and call it 5.5.6, since it's all java 1.3. The other
                            branch may have java 1.4 code in it (I told the coders that they
                            could introduce 1.4 code in it if they so desired), though I don't
                            know that anyone has done that yet. I think releasing 5.5.6 off the
                            branch of what will become 5.6 makes the most sense.

                            -Bryan
                          • Ross M. Lodge
                            ... I ve always thought it would be a good idea to release a beta or two from the production branch as release candidates and let people report bugs on them.
                            Message 13 of 14 , Jan 7, 2004
                            • 0 Attachment
                              merton_monk wrote:
                              > We're discussing that - 5.6 looks like it will have to be delayed,
                              > probably until next week. I hadn't thought about releasing another
                              > beta this week, but that's a good idea. The issue is that we now have
                              > 2 branches of code, one for the 5.6 release and one for what was
                              > intended to be the 5.7.1 release. I could go ahead and release off
                              > the 5.6 branch and call it 5.5.6, since it's all java 1.3. The other
                              > branch may have java 1.4 code in it (I told the coders that they
                              > could introduce 1.4 code in it if they so desired), though I don't
                              > know that anyone has done that yet. I think releasing 5.5.6 off the
                              > branch of what will become 5.6 makes the most sense.

                              I've always thought it would be a good idea to release a beta or two from
                              the production branch as "release candidates" and let people report bugs on
                              them. As it is, there's not really any way for anyone without CVS access to
                              get the production version as it currently stands and see if it works.

                              Ross
                            • merton_monk
                              ... another ... have ... off ... other ... the ... or two from ... bugs on ... access to ... works. Yeah - that makes sense. I think that s what I ll do. :)
                              Message 14 of 14 , Jan 7, 2004
                              • 0 Attachment
                                --- In pcgen@yahoogroups.com, "Ross M. Lodge" <ross.lodge@e...> wrote:
                                > merton_monk wrote:
                                > > We're discussing that - 5.6 looks like it will have to be delayed,
                                > > probably until next week. I hadn't thought about releasing
                                another
                                > > beta this week, but that's a good idea. The issue is that we now
                                have
                                > > 2 branches of code, one for the 5.6 release and one for what was
                                > > intended to be the 5.7.1 release. I could go ahead and release
                                off
                                > > the 5.6 branch and call it 5.5.6, since it's all java 1.3. The
                                other
                                > > branch may have java 1.4 code in it (I told the coders that they
                                > > could introduce 1.4 code in it if they so desired), though I don't
                                > > know that anyone has done that yet. I think releasing 5.5.6 off
                                the
                                > > branch of what will become 5.6 makes the most sense.
                                >
                                > I've always thought it would be a good idea to release a beta
                                or two from
                                > the production branch as "release candidates" and let people report
                                bugs on
                                > them. As it is, there's not really any way for anyone without CVS
                                access to
                                > get the production version as it currently stands and see if it
                                works.

                                Yeah - that makes sense. I think that's what I'll do. :)

                                -Bryan

                                >
                                > Ross
                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.