Hi Paul, On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 5:38 PM, Paul Martz <[email protected]> wrote: > I've not been following the discussion very closely. From your statement > above, it sounds like RegisterDotOsgWrapperProxy has been removed, and > external NodeKits are being forced to migrate to the new solution in order > to use current svn head.
The DotOsgWrappers all still existing unchanged in svn/trunk. The only change to the DotOsgWrapper infrastructure is that the old style wrappers themselves are now maintained in src/osgWrappers/deprecated_dotosg/osg rather than in the src/osgPlugins/osg. 3rd party NodeKits that using DotOsgWrapper should all work with svn/trunk without missing a beat. My hope for the new wrapper scheme is that they will be well received in the community and adopted quickly. From what I've seen already there is much greater potential and ease of maintenance with the new wrapper scheme - it supports both ascii and binary all with one set of wrappers, and both formats are extensible. The last bit about extensibility is key for 3rd party NodeKits as right now no one can extend the .ive format, all are stuck implementing extensions to the OSG's ascii format. This has long been a problem for the OSG and it's users, Wang Rui's new infrastructure solves this so I would expect there should be relief amongst the community that finally that bugbear will be put to rest. Please have a dig through it, it's far better than the old scheme of .osg and .ive. > Indeed, I've noticed that NodeKits that use > RegisterDotOsgWrapperProxy fail to link with an unresolved symbol. This will > break a great deal of external NodeKits, or force them to stay on OSG > v2.8.2., The missing symbol was related to the new ObjectWrappers, nothing should be broken with the old DotOsgWrappers. Come OSG-3.0 I do think we need to serious think about how provide a public interface to the old wrapper scheme. The wrapper scheme is what we want everyone to start using. > I think it'd be worthwhile to announce / discuss this in osg-users in a > different thread, one with a subject line that makes it clear that backwards > compatibility is being broken. I, for one, was under the assumption that > this new format was a feature addition, not a feature replacement. No backwards compatibility has been broken yet. Once the new infrastructure is up and running enough for the community to start playing with then Wang Rui and I will strike up a discussion on osg-users. It's a topic I've already touched upon in other threads w.r.t OSG-3.0, but the exact form of the new scheme hadn't taken concrete shape. Now it is. Robert. _______________________________________________ osg-submissions mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-submissions-openscenegraph.org
