Several months ago we brainstormed ideas for the roadmap. Everything people suggested should now be collected here, categorized but not prioritized or ordered:
http://wiki.inkscape.org/wiki/index.php/Roadmap
One thing we seem to be in consensus about is to get releases out more swiftly. To do this, I think what we should do is a) minimize the number of objectives for each release, and b) stagger the types of objectives in each release, so we rotate what team is in the spotlight each release.
With that in mind, what do you guys think about organizing our next few releases with the following focii?
Inkscape 0.92 ~ Infrastructure Focus
Inkscape 0.93 ~ Maintenance Focus
Inkscape 0.94 ~ Feature Focus
Inkscape 0.95 ~ Stability Focus
Inkscape 1.0 ~ Documentation Focus
I anticipate we'd pick a couple objectives for each release that are appropriate to the focus area, plus a smaller, secondary objective unrelated to the focus.
For 0.92, I'm thinking we've enough in the hopper that we should expedite it. What do you guys think?
Bryce
2015-03-31 8:27 GMT+02:00 Bryce Harrington <bryce@...961...>:
With that in mind, what do you guys think about organizing our next few releases with the following focii?
This is a nice idea, I would propose the following things for the first three releases:
Inkscape 0.92 ~ Infrastructure Focus
- Replace Autotools with something better - Build libinkscape as shared library - Migrate unit tests to Google Test or Boost Testing Library
Inkscape 0.93 ~ Maintenance Focus
- Fix the coordinate system - Clean up and move any generally useful geometry code to 2Geom
Inkscape 0.94 ~ Feature Focus
- Fix flowtext - Accurate boolops (I'm working on this right now)
Regards, Krzysztof
On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 10:17:33AM +0200, Krzysztof Kosiński wrote:
2015-03-31 8:27 GMT+02:00 Bryce Harrington <bryce@...961...>:
With that in mind, what do you guys think about organizing our next few releases with the following focii?
This is a nice idea, I would propose the following things for the first three releases:
Inkscape 0.92 ~ Infrastructure Focus
- Replace Autotools with something better
- Build libinkscape as shared library
- Migrate unit tests to Google Test or Boost Testing Library
How about, in order to get this release out the door more quickly, if we focus on the first as primary, libinkscape as a secondary goal, and for the testsuite just have the objective to make a firm decision.
For libinput I assume this is just for internal linkage, so just involves shuffling build rules around? If so, I agree this fits well with the new build system work. But if the scope is any larger than that - e.g. exposing a stable API for clients - we maybe should hold off a bit as that could be more involved to get done.
Inkscape 0.93 ~ Maintenance Focus
- Fix the coordinate system
- Clean up and move any generally useful geometry code to 2Geom
Inkscape 0.94 ~ Feature Focus
- Fix flowtext
- Accurate boolops (I'm working on this right now)
Regards, Krzysztof
Sounds good to start with. Anyone else want to share their thoughts?
Bryce
I'd like svg group based multi page support a little before 1.0 to give time to pdf and other plugin writers to update their code in time for 1.0
I think it could be a big feature for some of our users.
Martin,
On 31 March 2015 at 21:33, Bryce Harrington <bryce@...961...> wrote:
On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 10:17:33AM +0200, Krzysztof Kosiński wrote:
2015-03-31 8:27 GMT+02:00 Bryce Harrington <bryce@...961...>:
With that in mind, what do you guys think about organizing our next few releases with the following focii?
This is a nice idea, I would propose the following things for the first three releases:
Inkscape 0.92 ~ Infrastructure Focus
- Replace Autotools with something better
- Build libinkscape as shared library
- Migrate unit tests to Google Test or Boost Testing Library
How about, in order to get this release out the door more quickly, if we focus on the first as primary, libinkscape as a secondary goal, and for the testsuite just have the objective to make a firm decision.
For libinput I assume this is just for internal linkage, so just involves shuffling build rules around? If so, I agree this fits well with the new build system work. But if the scope is any larger than that - e.g. exposing a stable API for clients - we maybe should hold off a bit as that could be more involved to get done.
Inkscape 0.93 ~ Maintenance Focus
- Fix the coordinate system
- Clean up and move any generally useful geometry code to 2Geom
Inkscape 0.94 ~ Feature Focus
- Fix flowtext
- Accurate boolops (I'm working on this right now)
Regards, Krzysztof
Sounds good to start with. Anyone else want to share their thoughts?
Bryce
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website, sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/ _______________________________________________ Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
2015-04-01 3:33 GMT+02:00 Bryce Harrington <bryce@...961...>:
On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 10:17:33AM +0200, Krzysztof Kosiński wrote:
2015-03-31 8:27 GMT+02:00 Bryce Harrington <bryce@...961...>:
With that in mind, what do you guys think about organizing our next few releases with the following focii?
This is a nice idea, I would propose the following things for the first three releases:
I agree, good structure for the point releases.
Inkscape 0.92 ~ Infrastructure Focus
- Replace Autotools with something better
- Build libinkscape as shared library
- Migrate unit tests to Google Test or Boost Testing Library
How about, in order to get this release out the door more quickly, if we focus on the first as primary, libinkscape as a secondary goal, and for the testsuite just have the objective to make a firm decision.
Sounds good to me.
Bryce Harrington <bryce@...360...> writes:
With that in mind, what do you guys think about organizing our next few releases with the following focii?
Inkscape 0.92 ~ Infrastructure Focus
Inkscape 0.93 ~ Maintenance Focus
Inkscape 0.94 ~ Feature Focus
Inkscape 0.95 ~ Stability Focus
Inkscape 1.0 ~ Documentation Focus
Where would you put user interface in that scheme? As a user I believe it is important and needs some attention.
On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 06:49:02AM +0000, Michael Grosberg wrote:
Bryce Harrington <bryce@...360...> writes:
With that in mind, what do you guys think about organizing our next few releases with the following focii?
Inkscape 0.92 ~ Infrastructure Focus
Inkscape 0.93 ~ Maintenance Focus
Inkscape 0.94 ~ Feature Focus
Inkscape 0.95 ~ Stability Focus
Inkscape 1.0 ~ Documentation Focus
Where would you put user interface in that scheme? As a user I believe it is important and needs some attention.
Features.
Bryce
Re adoption of C++11 features, here's a useful list of compiler support: http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/compiler_support
Some fairly safe bets appear to include "auto" type declarations and variadic templates, both of which are pretty useful for tidying up syntax.
AV
On 1 April 2015 at 19:33, Bryce Harrington <bryce@...961...> wrote:
On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 06:49:02AM +0000, Michael Grosberg wrote:
Bryce Harrington <bryce@...360...> writes:
With that in mind, what do you guys think about organizing our next few releases with the following focii?
Inkscape 0.92 ~ Infrastructure Focus
Inkscape 0.93 ~ Maintenance Focus
Inkscape 0.94 ~ Feature Focus
Inkscape 0.95 ~ Stability Focus
Inkscape 1.0 ~ Documentation Focus
Where would you put user interface in that scheme? As a user I believe it is important and needs some attention.
Features.
Bryce
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website, sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/ _______________________________________________ Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
On Thu, Apr 2, 2015, at 09:54 AM, Alex Valavanis wrote:
Re adoption of C++11 features, here's a useful list of compiler support: http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/compiler_support
Some fairly safe bets appear to include "auto" type declarations and variadic templates, both of which are pretty useful for tidying up syntax.
One 'gotcha' we have to look for is *partial* support of features. I just the other week had to add a portability fix for some day-job code due to early C++11 support returning a bool from a function that finalized later on returning an enum.
I've added your link to the Inkscape page on C++11 http://wiki.inkscape.org/wiki/index.php/C%2B%2B11
But we really need to get the table for distros up to date. I added columns for compilers and then filled in for RHEL/CentOS. http://wiki.inkscape.org/wiki/index.php/Tracking_Dependencies#Distros
participants (7)
-
Alex Valavanis -
Bryce Harrington -
Christoffer Holmstedt -
Jon A. Cruz -
Krzysztof Kosiński -
Martin Owens -
Michael Grosberg