[Pkg-exppsy-maintainers] The future of PyEPL

[Per B. Sederberg]

On Jan 29, 2008 3:58 PM, Yaroslav Halchenko <debian at onerussian.com> wrote:
> > then the likelihood of working with pyglet drops even more.  That
> > should not be reason alone for us to package pyglet up, but they do
> > feed off one another.  For example, if I know there's a debian package
> > and I can easily experiment with pyglet, then it increases the
> > likelihood that I would not be able to take pygame anymore and would
> > feel compelled to push towards the new pyglet-based pyepl version.
>
> > Does anyone else have any additional thoughts?
> modularize pyepl code so it could use either pygame or pyglet? ;-)
>

In fact, one of the main problems with the current pyepl is that it is
NOT modular at all.  You pretty much have to load everything to use
anything.  That's why I'm reluctant to refactor the current pyepl to
use pyglet.  Instead, if we are going to take the time at all to make
any significant changes, it would probably be better to code it up
from scratch (obviously drawing on existing code), but with a
completely modular design from the start.

P

> --
> Yaroslav Halchenko
> Research Assistant, Psychology Department, Rutgers-Newark
> Student  Ph.D. @ CS Dept. NJIT
> Office: (973) 353-5440x263 | FWD: 82823 | Fax: (973) 353-1171
>         101 Warren Str, Smith Hall, Rm 4-105, Newark NJ 07102
> WWW:     http://www.linkedin.com/in/yarik
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pkg-exppsy-maintainers mailing list
> Pkg-exppsy-maintainers at lists.alioth.debian.org
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-exppsy-maintainers
>