Hi Paul, How big is osgOQ? I am wondering if its small enough it could be integrated into another NodeKit. Thoughts?
Robert. On Dec 8, 2007 4:19 PM, Paul Martz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Robert -- I'm happy to help with integrating osgOQ into the core > distribution. At this point, .ive support needs to be added, but this should > be trivial. Then it'd be nice to have a solution for cleaning up query IDs > (discussed recently); I can easily use the existing framework if the > OcclusionQueryNode is added to the osg library. > > I'm getting some testing from ISU (who funded the project), but nothing > other than "run the demo" testing from others. It'd be nice to see more > testing. > > I am investigating one bug at this time, but it is only in non-osgViewer > usage, so this shouldn't be a showstopper for 2.4 integration. > -Paul > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > > Of Robert Osfield > > Sent: Saturday, December 08, 2007 7:08 AM > > To: OpenSceneGraph Users > > Subject: [osg-users] Looking towards 2.4, and what might go into it. > > > > Hi All, > > > > After a two month break I'm now doing a purge of the > > submissions backlog. I doubt I'll get all the way through > > before Monday, but on Monday I'll tag the first dev release > > since 2.2 stable was made. This dev release will be 2.3.0 > > and be the first concrete step towards the final 2.4. This > > leads me on to asking the question - what features should we > > aim to integrate with 2.4? > > > > My own short list for contenders for integration are: > > > > osgOQ - Occlusion Querry support > > osgCal - Cal3D integration > > osgAL - OpenAL integration > > > > I'm not personally familiar with these libraries, but do know > > that they are known to work with the latest OSG so should be > > relatively straight forward to integrate. Thoughts for the > > authors, maintainers? > > What extra work would be appropriate before integration? > > Would you be happy with integration? > > > > My own inclination towards integration is to make it a bit > > easier for OSG users to assemble their application without > > chasing down lots of different nodekits all of which are > > maintained in different places with different build system > > and different release schedules. The downside for me is > > there is more work involved at my end at least initially > > while we get the build systems working well across the range > > of platforms that the OSG supports. Long term I'd hope that > > this will diminish and it'll be less support work associated > > with helping end users get things working at there end. It > > should also be possible to make the overall OSG dev > > experience for end users slicker as we should be able > > properly test and get areas like multiple > > window/multi-threaded usage properly excercised. > > > > I would also like to see the core OSG have support for > > scripting out of the bag, as well as integration with the > > main browsers. One has to gauage what is doable in what time > > frame so should be considered in terms of 2.4 or 2.6 etc versions. > > > > I'd like to see scripting supported out of the box to enable > > us to develop applications purely from scripting languages, > > so developers in this realm would just need the binaries to > > the OSG installed, and no need for C++ dev environment. > > There are limits to how much functionality you can expose in > > this direction, but my guess is it should be possible to > > write reasonable useful apps, and especially > > good for prototyping and cross platform portability. One has to ask > > which scripting languages to go for - Lua and/or Python? Lua > > would be the easiest to integrate in terms of being very self > > contained i.e. > > which could stick the whole of the lua interpreter into the > > core OSG distribution and one would hardly notice as its so tiny. > > > > Thoughts? > > Robert. > > > > ps. I'm still very busy with other on going work so please > > don't expect me to be able to dive into this stuff right > > away. Come 2008 I should start become a bit more available > > and able to start looking at progressing some of the above, > > so opening this stuff off for discussion now will help us > > mesh gears better when the time comes. > > _______________________________________________ > > osg-users mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-opensce > negraph.org > > _______________________________________________ > osg-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org > _______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
