Is there any objection to unifying SGIX_depth_texture and ARB_depth_texture in Mesa? The ARB extension is a superset of the SGIX extension, and there are no drivers that support one and not the other.
Specifically what I'm proposing is: - Replace GL_DEPTH_COMPONENT*_SGIX with GL_DEPTH_COMPONENT* in the core Mesa and driver code. - Eliminate gl_extensions::SGIX_depth_texture. - Have the GL_SGIX_depth_texture entry in default_extenions use ARB_depth_texutre as its flag. Opinions? ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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=/ _______________________________________________ Mesa3d-dev mailing list Mesa3d-dev@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mesa3d-dev
