Issue 191. ...FRACTIONAL_METRICS on Windows... (http://goo.gl/06NiG)
** Summary: I'm proposing we do nothing for 1.3.* releases. And
that we plan to invert our current behavior wrt fractional metrics in
future/2.0 release.
I'm ok with that. The PhET team may have stronger opinions.
+1 for moving to 1.4.
On Mar 20, 3:19 pm, piccol...@googlecode.com wrote:
Comment #6 on issue 154 by atdi...@gmail.com: Zoom handler doesn't interact
well with PSwing nodeshttp://code.google.com/p/piccolo2d/issues/detail?id=154
In the interest of a 1.3.1 release, I propose we move this to
last year, with 34%
of those users outside the USA, in 51 languages. And that's been
growing ~35-50% per year since 2004. So Piccolo is helping to
providing valuable educational tools to many users.
On Jul 21, 9:23 am, Michael Heuer heue...@gmail.com wrote:
cmal...@pixelzoom.com cmal
Yes, if 163 were fixed, that would change my vote to +1. 163 is the
only know problem with pswing. The other gripes I have with it are
internals, and that can certainly wait.
On Mar 9, 9:42 am, Michael Heuer heue...@gmail.com wrote:
Chris wrote:
This release is generally solid, with the
---
[ ] +1 I support this release
[ ] +0
[X] -0
[ ] -1 I oppose this release because...
I'm going to abstain from this vote.
This release is generally solid, with the exception of the pswing
package. Since issue 163 has been reopened, and since I've
investigated
I realize this is z-ordering. But if this is supposed to replace the
existing z-ordering interface, then raise and lower would be replacing
moveToFrontOf(PNode) and moveInBackOf(PNode). So, again, how does
raise and lower allow me to put one sibling in front/back of another
sibling? Imho, this
My client (PhET) uses PSwing quite heavily.
But I'm not going to -1 in order to get the 163 fix, for 3 reasons:
(1) The consensus within PhET is that we're comfortable with patching
our 1.3 copy to resolve 163.
(2) Imho PSwing needs an internal overhaul, to bring the code up to
the standards of
I'm re-voting, based on our discussion in issue 161.
---
[ ] +1 I support this release
[ ] +0
[ ] -0
[ X] -1 I oppose this release because (as described in issue 161)
full bounds behavior was changed by fixing issue 155.
--
Piccolo2D Developers Group:
This is a vote for releasing Piccolo2D.Java 1.3 based on release
candidate 1 (version 1.3-rc2).
1.3-rc2 is available from the downloads page:
http://code.google.com/p/piccolo2d/downloads/list?can=2q=1.3-rc2
---
[X] +1 I support this release
[ ] +0
[ ] -0
[ ] -1 I oppose
All 1.3-rc1 issues that I reported have been resolved. Many thanks!
What is the timeline for 1.3-rc2, and are there any other issues still
pending that must be resolved?
Chris
On Feb 1, 4:09 pm, cmal...@pixelzoom.com cmal...@pixelzoom.com
wrote:
See issue 160 for the endless series of events
An update on where we're at with the PSwing issues...
Issue 158 was resolved by Allain last week, and fixed a couple of our
problems.
Issue 159 was opened a few minutes ago, and is related to PSwing
transform/picking problems.
I am still investigating one additional issue, where a PSwing
in
PSwing.initializeComponent, could this be creating problems, depending
on the call order? It seems like there is component initialization
going on in the constructor that should really be in
initializeComponent.
Thoughts anyone?...
Chris
On Jan 28, 3:46 pm, cmal...@pixelzoom.com cmal...@pixelzoom.com
wrote
Does anyone recall what the purpose of PSwing.readObject is?
It's included in 1.3-rc1, but doesn't appear to be used.
--
Piccolo2D Developers Group: http://groups.google.com/group/piccolo2d-dev?hl=en
Never mind, stupid question, required for serialization. I've clearly
been working too long today...
--
Piccolo2D Developers Group: http://groups.google.com/group/piccolo2d-dev?hl=en
---
[ ] +1 I support this release
[ ] +0
[ ] -0
[X] -1 I oppose this release because...
PSwing appears to have some new problems, and PhET (my client) relies
heavily on PSwing. Specifically:
(1) Visibility issues; there are nodes that should be visible
,
Allain Lalonde
Sent from my iPod
On Oct 30, 2009, at 8:21 PM, cmal...@pixelzoom.com cmal...@pixelzoom.com
wrote:
Thanks Sam, glad to be aboard, looking for to more Piccolo use and
contribution.
If anyone is interested in my background, seewww.pixelzoom.com. My
company is named
Thanks Sam, glad to be aboard, looking for to more Piccolo use and
contribution.
If anyone is interested in my background, see www.pixelzoom.com. My
company is named PixelZoom, after the overloaded and misunderstood
OpenGL function, which is how I often feel ;-)
Chris
On Oct 30, 6:13 pm,
17 matches
Mail list logo
