I'll chime in and 3rd this assertion. OSG should not depend on Producer since OSG is the lower level foundation. osgProducer has always been a dependency inversion that is now becoming painfully apparent to some.
Regards, Marcus On Tue, 2006-11-14 at 12:28 -0800, Don Burns wrote: > Amen. > > On 11/14/06, Paul Martz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Options 3 and 4 appear very similar. I'd lean towards option 4 > myself; Don doesn't care for osgProducer, and Robert you said > you'd like to see it removed from the core OSG distribution in > the future. This seems like the right long term approach. > > To be honest, the current build order has always seemed a > little confusing to me. Producer provides higher-level > functionality than OSG but is built first, if you know what I > mean. It has always seemed to me like osgProducer and > osgProducer-based examples should have shipped with Producer, > then the build order would be OT, OSG, and P. > > Unlike OpenThreads, you don't need Producer or osgProducer to > use OSG. So having OSG depend on Producer seems like the wrong > setup. Changing that makes the most sense to me. > -Paul > _______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list [email protected] http://openscenegraph.net/mailman/listinfo/osg-users http://www.openscenegraph.org/
