There isn't anything in place at the moment. We've really been focusing on bug fixes and Python 3 for a qhile now, so this is the first time in a while that we're talking about any big changes.
It would be nice to have a short summary of proposed ideas just to get some consensus, since a lot of things have been thrown around in this thread. On Wednesday, July 26, 2017 at 3:55:11 PM UTC+9, dodgyville wrote: > > Hi, is there a central place to talk about features we'd like in pyglet > 3.0? Maybe a PEP-style system to submit proposals? :D :D :D > > On 19 June 2017 at 12:20, Benjamin Moran <[email protected] <javascript:> > > wrote: > >> Hey Dan, >> >> Thanks for taking the time to write all of that out. Why don't we start a >> new thread to discuss the timing of merging your work in? It's already in a >> fairly usable state, so having it in the default branch for active >> development can get a lot more eyes on it. There are a lot of Linux distros >> where AVbin just doesn't work at all anymore, so it would be a big >> improvement even in the current state of development. >> >> Regarding Python 3, I think that one point to keep in mind is that we >> don't actually have to change anything immediately. In fact, I think that >> it's probably best that we don't do any major rewrites. Instead, we just >> free ourselves of the burden of writing and testing under Python 2. We can >> then start cleaning up and modernizing modules as things slow down. >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sunday, June 18, 2017 at 5:58:04 PM UTC+9, Daniel Gillet wrote: >>> >>> Woaw, just found out this thread by coincidence. Great things happening >>> here! Lots of positive and creative thoughts. I like it. >>> >>> Regarding the FFmpeg bindings, it probably does not care too much about >>> py2 or py3. The initial goal was to merge it with the current branch 1.X. >>> >>> As Benjamin said I kind of stuck with some synchronization issues. And >>> it's terribly annoying because I'm unsure what is going on. And to make >>> things even more complicated it's Benjamin who experience these problems >>> (on Linux) while I don't necessarily notice them on Windows. I don't have >>> Linux here so it's hard to debug for another OS... After all my researches >>> so far, it seems that on both Windows and Linux frames get discarded once >>> in a while because the function to display the next frame is called too >>> late. But looking at the CPU, it's not really that busy. So I'm starting to >>> wonder if it's not related to pyglet scheduling mechanism which might not >>> be as accurate as needed for this case? But I don't find a way to prove (or >>> not) this theory. I might be completely wrong. And I would gladly be, >>> because it would push me in another direction. >>> >>> While doing this binding, I tried as much as I could to make the least >>> changes to the current code for the media player. But something is >>> inherently wrong with the current implementation. They basically choose to >>> synchronize the image with the sound. So if the sound is not played at the >>> right speed, this could cause also this jittering. The right approach is to >>> synchronize both sound and image to an independent clock. But this requires >>> to change many things in the media player. >>> >>> Just to say that I could accept some help if someone has some time. >>> Talking about the problems and deciding on the best way to fix things would >>> be helpful. Oh, and time... that's another issue right now. I'm pretty busy >>> and beginning of July I have some vacation. After that it should be better. >>> >>> Sorry if I derailed the topic. >>> >>> So coming back to the main question, I'm not an expert in OpenGL 3, but >>> I can see lots of benefits pushing pyglet in that direction. Regarding >>> support for Python 2, If we make a new branch, maybe it's not a bad idea to >>> drop py2 support. It's anyway supposed to lose support in 2020, right? >>> That's in about 2+ years. Now I'm also sure there are probably a >>> substantial amount of projects based on pyglet and still using py2. The >>> question is how many are still *active*? On the other hand, releasing a >>> python3 only version is a strong message towards the community and I think >>> it's a good thing. Personally I have no problem going forward with python 3 >>> only. >>> >>> Dan >>> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "pyglet-users" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected] <javascript:>. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected] >> <javascript:>. >> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/pyglet-users. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pyglet-users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/pyglet-users. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
