Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

SlimeVR 1.0 Release #577

Open
3 of 17 tasks
TheButlah opened this issue Feb 12, 2023 · 12 comments
Open
3 of 17 tasks

SlimeVR 1.0 Release #577

TheButlah opened this issue Feb 12, 2023 · 12 comments
Labels
Type: Discussion Further information is requested
Milestone

Comments

@TheButlah
Copy link
Contributor

TheButlah commented Feb 12, 2023

This is a tracking issue for us to discuss and track updates on features, bugs, and UX that we want in a SlimeVR 1.0 release. Our goal of this release is to have the software "shippable". We would be confident that we did everything we needed for reviewers and users to be happy, especially by nontechnical users.

Issues remaining for 1.0:

Not needed for for 1.0:

Descoped due to blockers:

@TheButlah TheButlah added the Type: Discussion Further information is requested label Feb 12, 2023
@TheButlah TheButlah pinned this issue Feb 12, 2023
@TheButlah TheButlah added this to the SlimeVR v1.0 milestone Feb 12, 2023
@Erimelowo
Copy link
Member

Erimelowo commented Feb 12, 2023

OSC can use legtweaks and the other goodies that SteamVR has

Can just say "Support OSCQuery for VRChat"

@ButterscotchV
Copy link
Member

Autobone UX done

AutoBone GUI needs a bit of a rework from its current state as in issue #446 and #283. Basically just needs to show the movements all before starting the recording and needs a proper finished visual guide for the movements.

@ButterscotchV
Copy link
Member

I think these issues should also be included in 1.0 or clarified/updated to fit it:

@TheButlah
Copy link
Contributor Author

TheButlah commented Feb 12, 2023

I think these issues should also be included in 1.0 or clarified/updated to fit it:

Eiren mentioned in #75 that its actually not necessary for 1.0, so I've updated the issue to clarify.

@TheButlah
Copy link
Contributor Author

Descoped OSCQuery due to conversations in #580

@ImUrX
Copy link
Member

ImUrX commented Mar 7, 2023

is there a tracking issue for having the tracker handling more than one server in the network?

@Eirenliel
Copy link
Member

#622 is required for 1.0.

@TheButlah
Copy link
Contributor Author

We have so much that is blocking 1.0 ;(

@Eirenliel
Copy link
Member

We have so much that is blocking 1.0 ;(

This is not how it works.1.0 is not a feature that we all wait when it can be implemented to be blocked. We work forward and we will get there eventually.

@TheButlah
Copy link
Contributor Author

IK, was making an observation that there is a lot that should be done before reviewers have this in hand. At the current pace of things, it seems unrealistic to assume everything on this list will happen before reviewers review.

@Eirenliel
Copy link
Member

I love how this has nothing that we actually need for 1.0 or have done for 1.0 😢

@TheButlah
Copy link
Contributor Author

TheButlah commented Jun 16, 2023

at the time we made it, this is what people felt was necessary, so...

All of these still look very important to me, except maybe the overlay stuff.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Type: Discussion Further information is requested
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants