Eric Jonas a écrit : >> I have to disagree with you. By integrating it to Gnome, it will "lock" >> it to the Gnome desktop in the mind of many people. If they are not >> using Gnome, they would tend to think that the OpenGL extension is only >> available on (or working with) a proper installation of Gnome desktop. >> > > I disagree that this would be a major problem; most of the users I > interact with are aware that software labeled as "gnome" does not > require one to use the whole gnome ball of wax. Even the gtk mailing > list archives and bugtracker are hosted on gnome.org. > > I am sure that the user you interact with are more geeky than the average person. ;-) > Moreso, by having it be a Gnome module, it might increase the widespread > adoption of the extension. > > One could even more say that from integrating it to GTK+ > Finally, holy crap people, it's currently _unmaintained_. If we don't > let -someone- pick it up, it'll suffer bitrot. The c++ wrapper I use > (gtkglextmm) already appears to be missing from the latest ubuntu > repositories. > > Please watch your language! Your are in a public place here.
It has been maintained by a "missed in action" person for a few years before Timothy Shead took back the whole project. It survived well and I am sure someone will take over this task really soon. There are still some issues concerning the "packaging" process but the core of gtkglext can be kept almost "as-is". The wrappers have to be updated. As for the Python wrapper, I have been invovlved in providing the Windows binary distribution for more than a year now. >> I don't understand what prevent us from integrating OpenGL support >> directly to GTK. >> > > I heard rumors that gtk+ was having maintainer issues, and are already > pretty hosed. On top of that, there's this bug: > > http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=119189 > Yes, I am aware of it for about a year now. As for the rumors about GTK+, I don't know them and I don't take rumors into account in my decision process. > Towards the end, they decided they didn't really care for the gtkglext > design, and someone had offered to pursue gldrawarea. It then appears to > have been dropped on the floor. > My personal feeling about gldrawarea is that it is too restrictive. That's why gtkglext was so popular. It would be a pity to put gldrawarea as the OpenGL extension in GTK+ rather than gtkglext. The reason they didn't care is maybe because they are too busy with other parts of GTK ? Wherever gtkglext will be integrated (or not), a specific maintainer will still be needed. Regards, Stéphane _______________________________________________ gtkglext-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtkglext-list
