Make a v0.2.0 release

[rossant]

With Nicolas' new implementation, bug fixes, new examples, code reorganization, cleaner repo :)

We should to a tag and maybe use the new releases feature on Github?

[rougier]

We need to fix the new shader code tests and we can even have a 0.2.0 release.

[almarklein]

Yes, we have changed the API (of the Program) quite a bit, so a larger bumb is at its place.

I propose that each of use takes a real critical look at the oogl API, so we can make changes before this release. Better sooner than later.

Also, we need to decide about the oogl+gl renaming.

[rougier]

The oogl is still pretty buggy (see unittest and issue #48).

On Aug 28, 2013, at 11:24 AM, Almar Klein notifications@github.com wrote:

Yes, we have changed the API (of the Program) quite a bit, so a larger bumb is at its place.

I propose that each of use takes a real critical look at the oogl API, so we can make changes before this release. Better sooner than later.

Also, we need to decide about the oogl+gl renaming.

---

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#41 (comment)

[rougier]

Still 2 errors in unittest.

Need also to remove/not distribute experimental directories or related add examples.

[almarklein]

The package that is build for distribution (i.e. upload to Pypi) will not get the visuals or shaders dir in it, because you would have to specify this in setup.py. So no need to remove these.

[rougier]

Cool !

On Sep 1, 2013, at 8:20 PM, Almar Klein notifications@github.com wrote:

The package that is build for distribution (i.e. upload to Pypi) will not get the visuals or shaders dir in it, because you would have to specify this in setup.py. So no need to remove these.

---

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#41 (comment)

[almarklein]

If we agree on the release notes (https://github.com/vispy/vispy/blob/master/doc/releasenotes.rst), I think we are good to go, right?

[almarklein]

Done!