On Tuesday 22 August 2006 16:38, Greg Ewing wrote:
>  There's nothing wrong with pursuing pygame-ctypes, but
>  I think it should be a different package with a different
>  name for the time being. It shouldn't be called 'pygame'
>  until it can function as a drop-in replacement in all
>  respects, including performance and range of supported
>  platforms.

I think the point René is trying to make is that pygame-ctypes will *never* 
replace what we currently know as pygame, even if it matches and/or exceeds 
functionality, performance and range of supported platforms.

So, to keep things moving along I guess what we need is a new name for 
pygame-ctypes. We can either:

1. avoid all reference to "pygame" -- "pysdl", "buffy", some random Monty
   Python reference, etc	
2. stick with referring to "pygame" -- "pygame-ctypes" is long, and isn't
   importable, so how about "pygame2", "pygametng", "pygameb5" (b5 was
   a better series ;), "pygamect" or something?


    Richard