> I think, we need to fix date for release, then we must work to honour > that date. That will make us to stretch our-self to work more, and our > release may see a day of light.
I agree that we must set a release date. "It will be ready when it is ready" means it won't be ready soon in a totally volunteer-run project. Although, since the library is still very unstable and hasn't freezed its API I think we must set a release plan before setting a date, and then set a date that is compatible with it. This roadmap is the first thing that comes to my mind: - merge gagan's work, polish - merge avneet's work, polish - make sure at least R13 to R2000 works reasonably (specially handles) - review bug reports in Savannah - review and incorporate patches in Savannah - check if all copyright assignments are OK - check if modified files carry respective author and year mentions What would make for (a) later release(s): - better R2004 support - merge Till's R2007 branch (although I see no reason not to merge it right now and warn the user that it'll crash) - review and merge guruprasad rane's testing framework - fix python bindings - make python bindings more python-ey (probably rewrite them from scratch with something else than SWIG) - incorporate work that Felipe Castro has done recently on libdwg Anyway, merging gagan's and avneet's work and doing some extra debug would suffice for an alpha release I guess. > I propose, 28th of Feb, 2014. Considering that we haven't had much activity here lately, this seems too tight. Maybe one month from now? What do you guys think of this plan? We would be glad if each one of us reading this list could pick up a task and work on it. BTW, GSoC 2014 has been launched and GNU has applied as an organization. -- Rodrigo Rodrigues da Silva ☂ http://metamaquina.com.br http://garoa.net.br http://polignu.org http://gnu.org
