Hi Robert, Seeing your answer, it seems that I was not as clear as I should have been. Well, about blogs, that's okay. But about gaming industry, I was just saying that advertising/marketing towards game developpers should be interesting. For now, I have the impression that some of them fear OSG as if it was too complex, or not enough game-oriented for them (which is wrong, IMHO). When I said that "Quick-and-dirty" would happen, I was talking about what some people may code (in general), but not about core-OSG code. Only clean and general-purpose code should be merged, as usual: I was not saying that quick-and-dirty should be merged. I began using OSG since 0.9.x (I remember how the wait until 1.0 was terrible!): I of course saw what has been achieved and think (as many) that the direction is the right one. I'm not trying to *change* OSG, I'm just trying to open discussions about what could be interesting for game devs or game engine devs, and thus for OSG.
And about management, I was not talking about management *of the project* but of some contributions, I'm terribly sorry if I seemed unpleasant. I was simply saying that some contributors are willing to build binaries, test things and do other tasks, and these short-terms tasks could be tracked on a public chart (or something like that) in order to prevent doing the same thing twice, and motivate some to fill the chart (well at least me!). I've done a draft on the wiki's sandbox for binaries builds: http://www.openscenegraph.org/projects/osg/wiki/SandBox/ContributorBuilds . Useful? Off-topic question: is it possible to change the HTML title, META keywords and descriptions in the wiki? Sukender PVLE - Lightweight cross-platform game engine - http://pvle.sourceforge.net/ Le Thu, 11 Dec 2008 16:17:03 +0100, Robert Osfield <robert.osfi...@gmail.com> a écrit: > Hi Sukender, > > On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 2:28 PM, Sukender <suky0...@free.fr> wrote: >> Blogging can be an idea too... but to be effective, it has to be made on >> blogs/pages that have a relatively hight importance for search engines, I >> guess. The problem is then the same as adverts, isn't it? > > You can't have an important blog till you start writing it... If we > link to the OSG related blogs from the OSG website, and to each others > blogs then one could probably hike up the visibility. Search engines > are so good these days that if you write stuff people are interested > in it'll be found. > >> Okay, so surely the *cross-platform* game market has to be infiltrated >> ("Don't create a game from scratch and for only one platform! Use OSG to cut >> your costs by 50% and increase your target clients by 25%!"... :) ). Maybe >> that way we would get some contributors that care about doing things that >> are well designed and that can be integrated into OSG? I mean >> "quick-and-dirty" game-oriented node kits (or plugins/etc.) would certainly >> be created, but only the most used and best designed and general-purpose >> ones would be candidates for integration (as usual). > > Quick-and-dirty has it's place, but it's not something I would like to > encourage for the core OSG. There items that are merged that are far > from mature, but these have to show the promise of maturing quickly > into something robust, useful and in keeping with the overall OSG > design. > > If you want Quick-and-dirty then the community pages are the place for > such prototype work. > > I believe the industry is moving in the direction of areas that the > OSG is strong in - cross platform development, threading, > multi-context, imersive vis (stereo monitors etc), flexibility, > interoperability and software quality. We have all this going for us, > we shouldn't need to compromise on the quality to just tick a few > extra boxes on some managers/engineers feature list. > > The is also the factor that OSG is not a stationary target, the > community is constantly improving existing codes and adding new > features, this is all done with little shake up of existing features. > In the earliest days the OSG had very few features of note yet some > pretty big companies adopted it because it what was there was well > engineered and it showed promise, such adoption happened when the OSG > was still in alpha (0.8.x days). > > Once you've been around the OSG for a while you'll probably appreciate > the steady progress that has been achieved year after year. In the > end one doesn't actually need to focus so much on snazzy features is > you make sure that your foundations are solid. > >> I think the same. But I also think that growing the community, even with >> good talents, will certainly be a hard task if there is nobody to manage a >> little bit the efforts of the generous volunteers, as said before. > > Certainly managing the OSG is no walk in park, but there certainly is > not a lack of management where management is possible. Please > remember I'm bit of veteran of managing open source projects now, I've > been doing full-time for the last 7 and half years, running a > successful free software business. Over the years I've seen plenty of > contributors with lots of latest/greatest ideas. Some we've > implemented, some were pie in the sky, some were idiotic. > >> In the meantime, I think I'll start a thread about search engines >> visibility; no objections to that? :) > > No objection, but I'd rather code than go discussing things to death. > > Robert. > _______________________________________________ > osg-users mailing list > osg-users@lists.openscenegraph.org > http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org _______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list osg-users@lists.openscenegraph.org http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
