Hi Cedric, On Dec 10, 2007 10:48 AM, Cedric Pinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I would not like to have those node kit in the core of osg, because the > functionnality they provide is not the core of osg, they are adaptators > for others libs, and for me it should be a nodekit in a third party.
The problem with 3rd party libs out in the community is often there are many different variants, but essentially do the same thing, this fractures the user/developer base using them and makes keeping things in sync with the core more problematic. It also requires users to go chasing this commonly used down. The downside for people who don't need these extra NodeKit is more source code, but since Cmake picks up on dependencies automatically - if you don't need them then the build system won't build them - so there is no overhead for you. Its not quite free as the snv update etc will be larger, but its actually pretty low cost for those who don't need them. > Instead i think an osgPython or osgOQ are a place in the core, because > it's realated directly with openGL and the scripting (osgPython) is a > wrapper to osg. But it seems i am the only one to have this opinion so > it means it will be integrated in the core ;) For the scripting language > i would prefer osgPython because python is a language Object and lua not > (maybe now it is ?). Lua can do OO just fine, its a very flexible little language. Also exposing functionality like osgAL and osgCal is easier within the scripted languages if they are already built as part of the core. End users will be much nearer the one stop shop when it comes to use of the OSG. Robert. _______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list osg-users@lists.openscenegraph.org http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
