Hi Paul,
Hi again, Robert. If you really must use the "gl_" name for matrix uniforms, then perhaps OSG's path forward for GL3 is to use the compatibility profile, which preserves all that old GL1/2 stuff. But it won't be "real" GL3 if you take this approach.
I don't think that's a good solution, better we just keep OSG on GL2 if we're going to do that.
I personally don't see the problem with using osg_ModelViewMatrix and osg_ProjectionMatrix instead of gl_*... It rather highlights that it's not OpenGL doing that work anymore, but OSG. That's the GL3 philosophy after all.
And if we think about it, if we're going to have multiple render back-ends, perhaps even DirectX, does it make sense to have gl_ in the variable names? I think DX is similar to GL3 in that it lets you name the input/output of your shaders however you want, so I would say an osg_* prefix would make sense.
If we are indeed going to branch OSG for GL3, then perhaps the best solution is to have the community maintain both branches. Apps on oldOSG would port to newOSG as they see fit, (with changes such as matrix uniform names).
I think that's inevitable, see how many people are still on OSG 2.2 or even 1.2, even if the port to recent versions is rather straightforward. People will continue to use OSG 2.x long after OSG 3.x using OpenGL 3.x is out.
The community maintenance part might not happen though. Perhaps the 2.x series will continue to have bug fix releases, and perhaps its maintenance could be handed over to someone else, but I doubt the same would happen for the 3.x series. I think Robert will want to keep doing what he's doing now.
J-S -- ______________________________________________________ Jean-Sebastien Guay [email protected] http://www.cm-labs.com/ http://whitestar02.webhop.org/ _______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
