-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Rizzen wrote: > I say a clean slate is best. Besides for older applications OSG 2.0 > would still be around to be used. > > OSG 3 = OpenGL 3 is the way I see it. >
You obviously do not have to maintain large application compatibility. If somebody told me now that I have to remove OSG and change to another scene graph in our application, I would shoot him on the spot. There is too much time and resources invested in this. I am tracking the OSG development because incremental changes are easier to make, but starting over, no thanks. Regarding the OSG 2.x long-term viability in parallel with a separate OSG 3 branch - I do not think that that is realistic. There simply aren't resources to maintain it. Good example is osgProducer - it was removed only recently and it doesn't work already because it is out of sync with Producer. This is not a complaint, just a fact - once something is deprecated, it will slowly die. Nobody is going to put more energy and effort in something like that. Regards, Jan -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mandriva - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFGwfKAn11XseNj94gRAtHVAJ9htkBFWWrcw4ZEv9Yo0fScrRWtigCeKb8r Wxh4X/tLdBZrzqTlHr5filg= =iZiy -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
