On 15 Apr 2011, at 08:41, Erik Hofman wrote: > On Fri, 2011-04-15 at 00:16 +0200, Christian Schmitt wrote: >> I can only agee with Vivian here: lets get this change into GIT, so that it >> doesn't get lost as so many others in the past. The shader is not perfect >> yet, but that should not hurt, as it is disabled as a default. Those who >> want to test and improve it are free to do so. >> Let me add that it's good to have people who work on things like shaders (we >> need every single one of them). > > I'm not opposed to adding the shaders but I want a good look at the code > to make sure that current functionality is not lost with the patch > before it gets committed. >
Like, Christian and Vivian stated earlier, I would also hate to see a patch getting lost, especially when it contains promise. This is why I originally suggested committing it. I would suggest that (even though it may not be production-ready yet), we commit the patch on the condition that; 1) the shader in question is disabled by default, and 2) in its disabled state doesn't have an adverse impact . Thoughts / Ideas? Cheers, Durk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Benefiting from Server Virtualization: Beyond Initial Workload Consolidation -- Increasing the use of server virtualization is a top priority.Virtualization can reduce costs, simplify management, and improve application availability and disaster protection. Learn more about boosting the value of server virtualization. http://p.sf.net/sfu/vmware-sfdev2dev _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
