Melchior FRANZ wrote: > Frankly, I don't see how (d) can compete with (c), which is > used and cared for by several Linux distributions as well as > used and tested by several million people. Do we really want > to pull in maintainership of our own OpenAL implementation > (for no good reason)? And that after you were absent for a > few years and just threatened to leave again "for good"? > What if people start to complain about FlightGear's OpenAL > not working with the latest MSys/Cygwin/OS-XI or "Microsoft > Fluffy"[TM]? Sorry, but that sounds like a suboptimal deal. > But I won't do the work either way, so I better shut up now.
I never said I wanted to put my own implementation into FlightGear.. Still, there is a new option available soon. Erik ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
