If you had a GKS- or PHIGS-based application, you might still be able to find some computers that support it, and your application might still run. Similarly, you have the option of freezing development on your OSG application and continuing to ship on OSG 2.8 for as long as there is OpenGL 2.x support on your target platforms. Paul Martz Skew Matrix Software LLC http://www.skew-matrix.com <http://www.skew-matrix.com/> +1 303 859 9466
_____ From: osg-users-boun...@lists.openscenegraph.org [mailto:osg-users-boun...@lists.openscenegraph.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Egli OpenSceneGraph (3D) Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2009 12:59 PM To: OpenSceneGraph Users Subject: Re: [osg-users] 3.0 or 2.10? Hi all, i don't understand why we should rewrite the whole openscenegraph core? Is the good old openGL and openscenegraph that faraway from openGL CL/openGL ES/.. How long does it take to port the whole greate functionality from osg2 to osg3? And how would it be possible to port the application form osg2 to osg3 or should we restart our development once we get osg3 because the osg2's API so different from osg3? I don't understand all of the problem. is the openGL close to death and we have to restart the greate osg2 lib. rewrite the core means, what will happen with osg2 applications, new features will no longer be added to the API (in long term view) and than the osg based application have to die, and the new application has to become new written. or what will the graphic industry do in near and long term future. i am not as close as some of the community are in the graphic community, i am closer to computer vision :-( :-) I undestand that we may have to overthink some part of the core to support new ideas in the graphic world. RealTimeRayTracer, ... ,... ,.. ,.. But openscenegraph is one of the best graphic engine currently in the world of computer graphics render engine. /sorry that i don't really understand the question and the problem we will get with osg2 adrian 2009/2/5 Cedric Pinson <morni...@plopbyte.net> Anyway i will help to host if it helps Cheers, Cedric Sukender wrote: Hi JS and Cédric, I'm a bit more in favor of what JS says. I agree that when the Forge is down it's really annoying, but centralizing all OSG related projects seem worth using a kind of forge (or something else). We really should avoid them dying by helping people maintaining them. Sukender PVLE - Lightweight cross-platform game engine - http://pvle.sourceforge.net/ Le Thu, 05 Feb 2009 17:49:57 +0100, Jean-Sébastien Guay <jean-sebastien.g...@cm-labs.com> a écrit: Hi Cedric, In theory the idea is cool but if people dont fill the current wiki why they will take energy to fill a forge ? I think it requires no more energy than hosting your project on your own site, or a site like SourceForge or Google Code. The difference is that it would be centralized, with an easy way to add maintainers, to generate interest in projects, to search, etc. A list of nodekits on the wiki, where links become broken and there is no way of knowing if a project is actually any good, doesn't help at all. And personnally if there is no support for git/mercurial i prefer to host the project where i can use those tools. You could always host your own version control repository, and use the forge's version control as a mirror. Plus I think some of the software supports Mercurial at least (mozdev does, why not others?) I think the main problem is to reference project, not to host them Maybe we just need to improve the reference of project on osg trac or a better categories... No, I think the main problem is generating interest and ensuring a project stays alive. A dumb project list does not help there. As it is now, a project is one person's pet and if that person stops maintaining it, it dies. Handing over project ownership does not happen when a project is one person's pet. Unless the project is on SourceForge or Google Code, but then we have the problem of having lots of projects on different systems using different tools to maintain them. I think we need a better balance between consolidation and distribution. Being too decentralized is not good either. Anyways, we'll see. J-S _______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list osg-users@lists.openscenegraph.org http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org -- +33 (0) 6 63 20 03 56 Cedric Pinson mailto:morni...@plopbyte.net http://www.plopbyte.net _______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list osg-users@lists.openscenegraph.org http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org -- ******************************************** Adrian Egli
_______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list osg-users@lists.openscenegraph.org http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
