Durk wrote
>
> 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?
>
I'm just putting together a data commit to do just that. But it will still
need the Fg/SG patches
Vivian
--
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
