[Pkg-exppsy-maintainers] The future of PyEPL
Per B. Sederberg
persed at princeton.edu
Tue Jan 29 21:43:14 UTC 2008
Exactly! I have close to zero free time and would not be able to do
it right now nor in the near future. It may be that this means we get
to use the current pyepl for awhile, making improvements, but no major
overhaul (i.e., no pyglet for now.)
Here's a couple more thoughts on pygame vs. pyglet:
- pygame is very mature and well-supported.
- pyglet just had it's first release and has a single author.
- One can see on the mailing list that, while pyglet's author is
quite skilled, he is also relatively set in where he sees the future
of pyglet (there are some relatively contentious threads with
discussions of suggested features and improvements.) Please note that
I could be misinterpreting the tone of the thread.
On Jan 29, 2008 4:32 PM, Yaroslav Halchenko <debian at onerussian.com> wrote:
> well... imho complete recoding is A LOT OF WORK ;-) Thus I am not sure
> if it is worth it at the moment... unless you have lots of spare time
> > 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.
> 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
More information about the Pkg-exppsy-maintainers