Hi sev, hi everyone<br><br>> There are many things to be added for version 1.2.0, including the GSoC<br>
> code, and<br>
> the new engines (i.e. SCI, Hugo, AGOS/Personal Nightmare, Fascination, Big<br>
> Red Adventure....)<br>
> Is any of these going to be added to 1.2.0? I'm guessing that Personal<br>
> Nightmare will be<br>
> added, not sure about the others. Are we adding any of these, or will they<br>
> wait for 1.3.0?<br>
<br>Indeed, Hugo is not ready. Things are missing in the windows version, and my feeling is that we should add support for DOS and Windows versions of the games at the same time, specially as H1 dos is freeware.<br><br>Concerning Fascination (GOB), it's indeed waiting for testers. Currently, no bug is known for this game, but of course it hasn't been tested enough (only by SylvainTV and me, AFAIK).<br>
I we have enough time for a testing session, then I think it would be a good idea to announce testing.<br><br>> Another subject to discuss is possible skipping of testing for particular<br>
> games. What I am thinking about is to analyze the commit history for each<br>
> engine and decide between those engines which stability was not altered<br>
> since the last release (i.e. no significant commits), and those which were<br>
> changed or are new. Then skip testing altogether for stable engines. The<br>
> number of games is really increasing, and without the event recorder it<br>
> becomes more and more hard to perform a full-blown pre-release testing.<br>
> What do you guys think?<br><br>Or maybe we could ask for a single test instead of two? No testing at all makes me nervous :)<br><br>Best regards,<br>Strangerke <br><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 1:47 PM, Eugene Sandulenko <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:sev@scummvm.org">sev@scummvm.org</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">On 24 August 2010 14:21, Filippos Karapetis <<a href="mailto:bluegr@gmail.com">bluegr@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> There are many things to be added for version 1.2.0, including the GSoC<br>
> code, and<br>
> the new engines (i.e. SCI, Hugo, AGOS/Personal Nightmare, Fascination, Big<br>
> Red Adventure....)<br>
> Is any of these going to be added to 1.2.0? I'm guessing that Personal<br>
> Nightmare will be<br>
> added, not sure about the others. Are we adding any of these, or will they<br>
> wait for 1.3.0?<br>
I would say this.<br>
<br>
It is pretty safe to integrate 2 GSoC tasks, those are decompiler and<br>
testbed engine. Both are completely independent.<br>
<br>
As of the remaining 2 tasks, I would prefer to postpone them to 1.3.0.<br>
I.e. announce start of the release preparations these days, and merge<br>
the tasks as soon as the release branch is created. This could give<br>
the porters more time for testing, as we are touching the very low<br>
level stuff here.<br>
<br>
The things which are safe to announce:<br>
* Translation support<br>
* Improved GUI<br>
* Androind and Dingux ports<br>
<br>
Probably it is safe to announce support for /some/ SCI games. I.e. we<br>
are not obliged to announce every one of those are being tested now,<br>
as there are quite a bunch of bugs.<br>
<br>
Speaking of Fascination, I am fine with it, but testing has to be announced.<br>
<br>
Hugo is probably not yet ready, though it is up to Strangerke to say<br>
'go' for H1 win.<br>
<br>
AGOS/Personal Nightmare? At least I am not aware of it. If it was made<br>
completable, we have to update our NEWS file.<br>
<br>
As of the version numbering. I see no difference is 1.2.0b followed by<br>
1.2.0, or 1.2.0 followed by 1.2.1. It is exactly the same thing<br>
release-wise. If you guys feel better with betas, I am completely OK<br>
with it.<br>
<br>
The main concern for me now is SCI engine. The testing although being<br>
fruitful and effective became a bit of load to the developers. I do<br>
not want to worsen the situation or push low quality engine to<br>
release. It is up to you guys to tell me whether you are ready or<br>
not. We may decide to save SCI for 1.3.0.<br>
<br>
Currently our release got slipped by a month, i.e. usually we had it<br>
on last week of August. If we start now, we will have it at mid of<br>
September as the fastest.<br>
<br>
Another subject to discuss is possible skipping of testing for<br>
particular games. What I am thinking about is to analyze the commit<br>
history for each engine and decide between those engines which<br>
stability was not altered since the last release (i.e. no significant<br>
commits), and those which were changed or are new. Then skip testing<br>
altogether for stable engines. The number of games is really<br>
increasing, and without the event recorder it becomes more and more<br>
hard to perform a full-blown pre-release testing. What do you guys<br>
think?<br>
<br>
<br>
Eugene<br>
<br>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
Sell apps to millions through the Intel(R) Atom(Tm) Developer Program<br>
Be part of this innovative community and reach millions of netbook users<br>
worldwide. Take advantage of special opportunities to increase revenue and<br>
speed time-to-market. Join now, and jumpstart your future.<br>
<a href="http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-atom-d2d" target="_blank">http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-atom-d2d</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Scummvm-devel mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Scummvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net">Scummvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/scummvm-devel" target="_blank">https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/scummvm-devel</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br>