> Be sure I value your feedback, but we are exploring new lands here. > There is not so much OSG deferred rendering example or real > application around, so please be forgiving. > And I don't think Flightgear is unusable for anybody. The Rembrandt > renderer is optional and the classical/2.6 renderer should work for > everybody.
Sorry if that came across the wrong way. I am well aware of this - I am probably more worried about aircraft and/or scenery being converted and committed at this stage than about project Rembrandt as such, since the default renderer is working just fine. What also bothers me is the attitude I've come across with other people (not you!) which goes like 'Don't bother writing something for the 2.6 renderer because Rembrandt will be there.' - which sounds more like replacement than optional. I'm also observing statements being made in the forum by various people - some are rather cautious, others raise expectations for a release which may backfire badly if there turn out to be issues with many cards. So I'm not writing this out of the blue. Personally, I can live without shadows if my GPU turns out not to support this at all in the end - but I can't really if all aircraft at night use Rembrandt in a non-optional way and all I get to see with default rendering is darkness. And so on. I'll explore your suggestions and let you know what happens. Cheers, * Thorsten ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Better than sec? Nothing is better than sec when it comes to monitoring Big Data applications. Try Boundary one-second resolution app monitoring today. Free. http://p.sf.net/sfu/Boundary-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
