Well not exactly what I was thinking, most of what you described as wanting to have: physics, audio, animation; is already done heavily in Delta3D and we would both benefit from having the same code base we worked off of. This gives us an up to date osg, and OSG all the game apis integrated that you want.
It seems strange to want gameplay api/sdk elements in the core of osg. Since this is more of a rendering engine and not a game engine. And yes I'm aware of the trunk / 2.2, I've billed several hours to it already :). -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert Osfield Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2007 11:08 AM To: OpenSceneGraph Users Subject: Re: [osg-users] State of content pipeline On Dec 20, 2007 3:51 PM, Danklefsen, Allen M <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > We should just use the same code trunk for OSG and Delta3D :). Could you be a bit more specific? I presume you are referring to Delta3D lagging behind OSG releases. Delta3D does have a branch that is ported to OSG trunk/2.2 but its up to the Delta3D team to move across to and get the changes into trunk. Robert. _______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.or g _______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
