Has there been an official release of JSBSim?

[Phillip-M-Feldman]

When I look at https://github.com/JSBSim-Team/jsbsim/releases, I see the word "pre-release" in an orange box. It would be nice to have an official release. Are there any plans for this?

[jdmarch]

Supporting this request, Enthought would like to include JSBSim in the Enthought Python Distribution / Canopy, but we are not able to identify a suitable release with an identifiable publicly-targeted (non-dev) version number, preferably on pypi. Do you have an ETA for a formal release? Thanks!

[bcoconni]

It would be nice to have an official release. Are there any plans for this?

As I mentioned in the issue #69, the only thing that really is missing is a decision. At the moment, the code is quite stable even though there are currently three issues which are tagged as bugs (#31, #89 and #123). Even though issue #31 is not a bug of JSBSim strictly speaking but rather an issue with the design of one the tests of the JSBSim test suite.

My suggestion would be to tag the code as "stable" once the bugs #89 and #123 are fixed.

In the future, we could coordinate JSBSim releases with FlightGear releases (i.e. one every quarter). That way we could collect bugs from FlightGear users in addition to our owns.

@agodemar @seanmcleod
Does that seem reasonable to you ?

[agodemar]

Does that seem reasonable to you ?

@bcoconni yes it is.

[Phillip-M-Feldman]

#123 is an edge case that is unlikely to affect most users. If it can be fixed quickly, that's great. If not, it seems like this should not hold up the release.

[seanmcleod]

Does that seem reasonable to you ?

Yes let's piggyback on FlightGear's additional testing and them declaring a particular JSBSim commit stable enough for them to include it in their quarterly stable release.

I'm assuming FlightGear developers and users are the largest user base of JSBSim.

So based on these quarterly stable releases we would also release the same commit to Pypi.

[bcoconni]

@jdmarch

Do you have an ETA for a formal release?

All the contributors are volunteers and real life always takes priority. So no ETA as far as I am concerned. The only thing I commit to is that the release of a stable version has taken a very high priority in my JSBSim agenda 😃

[bcoconni]

@Phillip-M-Feldman

#123 is an edge case that is unlikely to affect most users. If it can be fixed quickly, that's great. If not, it seems like this should not hold up the release.

The guys developing the Space Shuttle model are most certainly in strong disagreement with your statement 😉

[Phillip-M-Feldman]

I see no signs of progress towards a stable release. Is someone actually working issues #89 and #123?

I offered to try to help with issue #123 if someone can point me to the relevant code, but no one responded to my post.

[bcoconni]

@Phillip-M-Feldman

I see no signs of progress towards a stable release. Is someone actually working issues #89 and #123?
I offered to [..snip..] , but no one responded to my post.

I think I have already responded to such statements. So quoting myself :

All the contributors are volunteers and real life always takes priority.

If that is not good enough for you then I am sorry but as far as I am concerned I am not willing to commit myself to an agenda. I have enough project schedules and deadline pressure in my day job.

[bcoconni]

I just created a new branch v1.0.0 to prepare the release of JSBSim 1.0.0
The packages can be downloaded from the Release Candidate v1.0.0.

Waiting for feedback before making the official release.

[bcoconni]

As I already mentioned in issue #69, 🎉 JSBSim 1.1.0 has been released 🎉
Binaries can be downloaded from the v1.1.0 release on GitHub.
Alternatively Python packages can be installed with pip:

> pip install jsbsim

Enjoy !