Re: [Open Babel] Next Development Snapshot

[Michael B. <mb...@gm...>]

On Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 12:21:48PM -0500, Geoff Hutchison wrote:
> > >I don't think we're quite at the stage for a 1.99.1 release, much less at
> > >2.0 release. However, I think we have some nice bugfixes and new features,
> > >esp. including Peter's CML code to make a new "development snapshot."
> >
> > I'd be grateful to know what the philosophy of these three concepts is.
> > Presumably at 2.00 the code is stable enough to provide (hopefully) robust
> > babel.exe. Is that true of 1.99? Would a snapshot have a distributable
> > *.exe or is that too risky?
> 
> I guess I should have been more explicit.
> * A "developer snapshot" is the current state of the source. It's intended
> for those currently using the code directly in other programs and those
> willing to compile the source. There may be known bugs. There's no
> scheduled "freeze" and usually little effort to rigorously test the code.

Sure. I just wanted to point out that we could just as well call it
'1.99.1' with a big 'UNSTABLE' on top of README. I'm already somewhat
amazed how many people caught interest, but if we 'release' a
development snapshot with cml and announce it (not as the big, final
thing, but as an alpha or beta) we might get some more testers.
 
> * The 2.0 release should be relatively feature complete and stable.

agreed.
 
> I think it may be a good idea to distribute binaries with a "release," but
> I usually prefer to take some time to bug-test and clean up known problems
> before a "release."

OK, fair enough. I'm in the lab around 10 hours a day right now, so I
don't have much time testing openbabel, sorry.

> > Hmm, I'd say we should make a code snapshot without executable and make
> > babel.exe available seperate.
> 
> I guess I'm just not sure how bug-free the code is at the moment. Have
> others really tested the source and used the resulting files? How decent
> is the XYZ -> Mol2 or the like with the perceived bond orders?
 
Perhaps it's a circular problem. If we frankly state that this code
might be buggy and is test-worthy, people might come and test it. But I
guess chances are better if they have something to download from.

> There's already a *large* amount already in there. 

good to know :)

> > If we release a snapshot, I'd try to squeeze it into the current Debian
> > stable Distribution, but I can't guarantee that, as we're supposed to
> > release on May, 1st.
> 
> I don't think that's such a big deal. There are Debian packages in the
> pipeline thanks to you and I think that's a significant start.

I already made half a dozen maintainers suggest openbabel in their
packages :)

I just thought that having a mostly funcional cml support would be a
very cool thing to have, as Debian only releases every second year these
days. But then, updating stable packages after release is _very_
difficult (unless there are remote root exploits), so staying with the
current package might be safer. I don't want anyone to rush a release of
course.

bye,

Michael