Why is the 2015.03 kept as the "official" release?
ClintGoss wrote
However, I'm guessing that the developers may not always be aware of the
value of OpenSCAD to a wide and largely un-heard user community out
there
It's extremely useful to me, and will be even more useful in the near
future, as I'm moving to a new hous and will need to do extensive
remodelling and build some new furniture. Ordinary CAD doesn't work for my
programmer brain. I have a huge gratitude debt to the devs.
Sadly, my experience in programming lies elsewhere (large administrative and
technical database systems), so I can't help much, except sharing a few
useful OpenSCAD code snippets. I also have quite a few designs which I can
use as a test bench for new versions.
I'm a hobby user, but if I were a professional user (which I am with several
other software products), I would find a 3 years old version worrying. For a
professional user, investing time (and thus money) into a product is a risk,
and you must consider stuff like "What if it stops working with an operating
system upgrade and no one fixes it? How will I deliver on my contracts?".
I'd also suspect that it'll affect sponsoring, such as Google Summer of
Code.
I think there are many benefits to "tying up loose strings" and do a
release, and I'd do what I can to help, even if it's just testing. I think
others are prepared to help as well.
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
Also very willing to help as a tester.
I'm actively using OpenSCAD, but I'm stuck on the last stable release
because I fear a crash or bug taking out my fairly complex designs more than
I fear missing out on the new features... but some of them sound good!
Is there any element here of the 'best' being the enemy of the 'good'?
There's been so much great work done in 3 years it must be daunting to
consider regression testing all of it on all 3 platforms...
I wonder if there is any consensus among the devs for a smaller number of
new/fixed features that they agree are a) an improvement, and b) stable?
Then, it might be worth doing a 'beta release' that the community can then
help to bug-test?
Big thanks to all the awesome work being done by the devs.
Cheers,
Alex Gibson
admg consulting
edumaker limited
. Project management
. Operations & Process improvement
. 3D Printing
-----Original Message-----
From: Discuss [mailto:discuss-bounces@lists.openscad.org] On Behalf Of
Troberg
Sent: 21 August 2018 09:25
To: discuss@lists.openscad.org
Subject: Re: [OpenSCAD] Why is the 2015.03 kept as the "official" release?
ClintGoss wrote
However, I'm guessing that the developers may not always be aware of the
value of OpenSCAD to a wide and largely un-heard user community out
there
It's extremely useful to me, and will be even more useful in the near
future, as I'm moving to a new hous and will need to do extensive
remodelling and build some new furniture. Ordinary CAD doesn't work for my
programmer brain. I have a huge gratitude debt to the devs.
Sadly, my experience in programming lies elsewhere (large administrative and
technical database systems), so I can't help much, except sharing a few
useful OpenSCAD code snippets. I also have quite a few designs which I can
use as a test bench for new versions.
I'm a hobby user, but if I were a professional user (which I am with several
other software products), I would find a 3 years old version worrying. For a
professional user, investing time (and thus money) into a product is a risk,
and you must consider stuff like "What if it stops working with an operating
system upgrade and no one fixes it? How will I deliver on my contracts?".
I'd also suspect that it'll affect sponsoring, such as Google Summer of
Code.
I think there are many benefits to "tying up loose strings" and do a
release, and I'd do what I can to help, even if it's just testing. I think
others are prepared to help as well.
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
OpenSCAD mailing list
Discuss@lists.openscad.org
http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
alexgibson wrote
I'm actively using OpenSCAD, but I'm stuck on the last stable release
because I fear a crash or bug taking out my fairly complex designs more
than
I fear missing out on the new features... but some of them sound good!
Don't worry about that. Just backup your scripts, and you can always go back
to them.
alexgibson wrote
Is there any element here of the 'best' being the enemy of the 'good'?
There's been so much great work done in 3 years it must be daunting to
consider regression testing all of it on all 3 platforms...
I wonder if there is any consensus among the devs for a smaller number of
new/fixed features that they agree are a) an improvement, and b) stable?
Then, it might be worth doing a 'beta release' that the community can then
help to bug-test?
Well, there might be a workable route. Simply take the current version and
promote it to release candidate. Let people try it for a while, and if
nothing drastic comes up in a few months, promote it to a proper version.
I've been working with the customizations version for a long time now, and
I've yet to find a single way in which it is inferior to the 2015.03
version. In other words, I have good confidence that you could do as
suggested above and get something that's better than the current official
version.
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
Simply take the current version and promote it to release candidate.
That's got my vote!
Uh ... might there be a list someplace that summarizes the updates from
2015.03 to the new RC? (has a nice right to it ... "the new RC").
-- Clint Goss, Ph.D.
Goss.com http://www.goss.com/ ... index of all our web sites
On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 8:31 AM, Troberg troberg.anders@gmail.com wrote:
alexgibson wrote
I'm actively using OpenSCAD, but I'm stuck on the last stable release
because I fear a crash or bug taking out my fairly complex designs more
than
I fear missing out on the new features... but some of them sound good!
Don't worry about that. Just backup your scripts, and you can always go
back
to them.
alexgibson wrote
Is there any element here of the 'best' being the enemy of the 'good'?
There's been so much great work done in 3 years it must be daunting to
consider regression testing all of it on all 3 platforms...
I wonder if there is any consensus among the devs for a smaller number
of
new/fixed features that they agree are a) an improvement, and b) stable?
Then, it might be worth doing a 'beta release' that the community can
then
help to bug-test?
Well, there might be a workable route. Simply take the current version and
promote it to release candidate. Let people try it for a while, and if
nothing drastic comes up in a few months, promote it to a proper version.
I've been working with the customizations version for a long time now, and
I've yet to find a single way in which it is inferior to the 2015.03
version. In other words, I have good confidence that you could do as
suggested above and get something that's better than the current official
version.
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
OpenSCAD mailing list
Discuss@lists.openscad.org
http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
Simply take the current version and promote it to release candidate.
Might be an over-simplification, i don't know what the release process
entails and there may be specific things that the mods/owners/etc need
to happen before cutting an RC.
Looking at the backlog of issues (500+) and PR's (70+) i'm thinking that
i'd be running screaming!
On Tue, 21 Aug 2018, at 11:08 PM, Clint Goss wrote:
Simply take the current version and promote it to release candidate.> That's got my vote!
Uh ... might there be a list someplace that summarizes the updates
from 2015.03 to the new RC? (has a nice right to it ... "the new RC").>
-- Clint Goss, Ph.D.
Goss.com[1] ... index of all our web sites
On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 8:31 AM, Troberg
troberg.anders@gmail.com wrote:>> alexgibson wrote
I'm actively using OpenSCAD, but I'm stuck on the last stable
release
because I fear a crash or bug taking out my fairly complex designs
more than I fear missing out on the new features... but some of
them sound good!
Don't worry about that. Just backup your scripts, and you can always
go back>> to them.
alexgibson wrote
Is there any element here of the 'best' being the enemy of the
'good'?
There's been so much great work done in 3 years it must be
daunting to consider regression testing all of it on all 3
platforms... I wonder if there is any consensus among the devs for
a smaller number of new/fixed features that they agree are a) an
improvement, and b) stable? Then, it might be worth doing a 'beta
release' that the community can then help to bug-test?
Well, there might be a workable route. Simply take the current
version and>> promote it to release candidate. Let people try it for a while,
and if>> nothing drastic comes up in a few months, promote it to a proper
version.>>
I've been working with the customizations version for a long time
now, and>> I've yet to find a single way in which it is inferior to the 2015.03>> version. In other words, I have good confidence that you could do as>> suggested above and get something that's better than the current
official>> version.
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
OpenSCAD mailing list
Discuss@lists.openscad.org
http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org>
Links:
I believe all non-experimental features are stable enough for a release.
It would be really nice to get some of the experimental ones ready though, but those things take time and we’s (as always) short on developers, especially the kind who’re willing to do the boring work related to testing, documentation and release work :/
Cutting an intermediate release could buy us some time though.
Are there any experimental features that people feel absolutely need to make it into such a release?
-Marius
Cutting an intermediate release could buy us some time though.
It's also not good to dump too many new things on the users at once, at
least not if they mean changes to how things works.
Are there any experimental features that people feel absolutely need to
make it into such a release?
I don't know if it's experimental or not, but customization is a big one for
me. I use it in every single design I do. I live and die by parametric
design.
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
I live and die by parametric design.
So do I but I have never tried the customiser. I prefer all my parameters
to be set in the source code under source control, not a GUI. OpenSCAD is
not a GUI based CAD system.
I don't see why assert, echo, lc-each, etc, are still experimental.
On 23 August 2018 at 08:34, Troberg troberg.anders@gmail.com wrote:
Cutting an intermediate release could buy us some time though.
It's also not good to dump too many new things on the users at once, at
least not if they mean changes to how things works.
Are there any experimental features that people feel absolutely need to
make it into such a release?
I don't know if it's experimental or not, but customization is a big one
for
me. I use it in every single design I do. I live and die by parametric
design.
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
OpenSCAD mailing list
Discuss@lists.openscad.org
http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
On Aug 23, 2018, at 6:34 AM, nop head nop.head@gmail.com wrote:
I don't see why assert, echo, lc-each, etc, are still experimental.
There are tickets open for all these; I believe it’s mostly about missing documentation, examples etc.
-Marius
nophead wrote
So do I but I have never tried the customiser. I prefer all my parameters
to be set in the source code under source control, not a GUI. OpenSCAD is
not a GUI based CAD system.
Well, my designs are often based on body measurements. I don't want to make
another source version just to set parameters for another person.
It's one thing if you just want to tweak around to get good values, but if
you actually want to make something customizable, it's useful.
Likewise, I have designs that bend or move, and I don't want to have to
change the source to go through the full range of motion to check that there
is no collisions. Just moving a slider is much more practical.
But, that's a bit off topic. I'm happy to discuss it, but it should probably
be done in a new thread.
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/