Gilles Tran wrote:
> 
> I agree that this is a little confusing. I guess that the binaries.utilities group
> was created for non-pov-made utilities like the dome generator or the tree creator
> and that posting zipped macros there is extending its initial purpose. Now, macros
> are "utilities" so when someone is looking for, say, a tree generator, one doesn't
> know at first if it's a macro or an executable and it's logical to look for it in
> a "utilities" group. In fact, from the user's point of view, it may even not
> matter if it's text or binary. Multiplying the groups could be confusing too, I'd
> rather have a single "utilities" group for both text & binaries, macros &
> non-macros (though this could be confusing too). No good solution there I fear and
> I still rely on Ken Tyler to keep track of the utilities posted here and there...
> 
> Gilles

  I consider a Pov script that defines a scene file as exactly that.
A one time piece of script that has a one time, single ended, useage.
A utility is described as something that has optional user definable
attributes that can be used in a non singular way. I therefore will
accept Gilles accertion that macro's and include files similar to
those brilliant master pieces by Chris Colefax as utility in nature
and perfectly acceptable within the confines of this particular group.

  These are of course my own subjective opinions and are not necessarily
those of the newsgroup administrator or are they those of the Pov team
themselves. I speak only for myself in this regard.

-- 
Ken Tyler

mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net

Post a reply to this message