Hi Sukender,
On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 2:28 PM, Sukender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Blogging can be an idea too... but to be effective, it has to be made on
> blogs/pages that have a relatively hight importance for search engines, I
> guess. The problem is then the same as adverts, isn't it?
You can't have an important blog till you start writing it... If we
link to the OSG related blogs from the OSG website, and to each others
blogs then one could probably hike up the visibility. Search engines
are so good these days that if you write stuff people are interested
in it'll be found.
> Okay, so surely the *cross-platform* game market has to be infiltrated
> ("Don't create a game from scratch and for only one platform! Use OSG to cut
> your costs by 50% and increase your target clients by 25%!"... :) ). Maybe
> that way we would get some contributors that care about doing things that are
> well designed and that can be integrated into OSG? I mean "quick-and-dirty"
> game-oriented node kits (or plugins/etc.) would certainly be created, but
> only the most used and best designed and general-purpose ones would be
> candidates for integration (as usual).
Quick-and-dirty has it's place, but it's not something I would like to
encourage for the core OSG. There items that are merged that are far
from mature, but these have to show the promise of maturing quickly
into something robust, useful and in keeping with the overall OSG
design.
If you want Quick-and-dirty then the community pages are the place for
such prototype work.
I believe the industry is moving in the direction of areas that the
OSG is strong in - cross platform development, threading,
multi-context, imersive vis (stereo monitors etc), flexibility,
interoperability and software quality. We have all this going for us,
we shouldn't need to compromise on the quality to just tick a few
extra boxes on some managers/engineers feature list.
The is also the factor that OSG is not a stationary target, the
community is constantly improving existing codes and adding new
features, this is all done with little shake up of existing features.
In the earliest days the OSG had very few features of note yet some
pretty big companies adopted it because it what was there was well
engineered and it showed promise, such adoption happened when the OSG
was still in alpha (0.8.x days).
Once you've been around the OSG for a while you'll probably appreciate
the steady progress that has been achieved year after year. In the
end one doesn't actually need to focus so much on snazzy features is
you make sure that your foundations are solid.
> I think the same. But I also think that growing the community, even with good
> talents, will certainly be a hard task if there is nobody to manage a little
> bit the efforts of the generous volunteers, as said before.
Certainly managing the OSG is no walk in park, but there certainly is
not a lack of management where management is possible. Please
remember I'm bit of veteran of managing open source projects now, I've
been doing full-time for the last 7 and half years, running a
successful free software business. Over the years I've seen plenty of
contributors with lots of latest/greatest ideas. Some we've
implemented, some were pie in the sky, some were idiotic.
> In the meantime, I think I'll start a thread about search engines visibility;
> no objections to that? :)
No objection, but I'd rather code than go discussing things to death.
Robert.
_______________________________________________
osg-users mailing list
osg-users@lists.openscenegraph.org
http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
