POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.general : Parallel / Distributed Network Rendering Included in POV : Patcher-bashing (was: Parallel / Distributed Network Rendering Included in POV) Server Time
11 Aug 2024 19:33:35 EDT (-0400)
  Patcher-bashing (was: Parallel / Distributed Network Rendering Included in POV)  
From: François Dispot
Date: 24 Nov 2001 18:48:30
Message: <3C0031BE.9060505@club-internet.fr>
Thorsten Froehlich wrote:

> Just a general comment:
> The discussion of parallel rendering, a binary scene file format and/or
> other radical scene description changes are suggested every few month.
> However, everything has been said before and the decision to implement
> either is not in the hands of those discussing it.  So no need for to people
> waste their energy and time to discuss things they can neither change at the
> moment nor will be responsible to change in the future...
> 
>     Thorsten
> 

"We know what is good for you".

Disclaimer: I really appreciate the hard work done by the pov team, a 
part of which includes the extremely long, painful and not rewarding 
process of hardening, packaging, and documenting the software we all use 
and enjoy.

Now, while I regret that these often sterile discussions always pop up 
from people who did not inquire about what has already been done and 
always want to reinvent the wheel (there are at least 5 different 
distributed versions after POVRay 3.1), this kind of statement sounds 
like an insult to me.

Following your often repeated statements, a good world would be a world 
without anybody implementing anything except under the official control 
of the One Team. A world without patches. A world without macros, 
isosurfaces, improved radiosity, light and vista buffers to quote a few, 
just because people discussing about them do not have the power to 
decide whether these features should be implemented or not.

If people want to try something, just let them do it. Even the current 
POVLEGAL allows them to. You won't believe me: it even encourages them 
to. Many of us are not professional programmers, thus the code resulting 
from our work is often bugged, poorly written, docummented and so on. 
But why should we not try to do things if:
- They do not exist
- We need them for some reason
- We have the will and the knowledge to implement them

Do you think that people who would think it nice to have a generic 
particle system, or something about cloth-like surfaces, or 
post-processing, or motion blur will just start thinking "this guy is 
right: we are not entitled to add our crap to the official work, let's 
stop our outrage"? I hope not. Call this proof of concept if you want, 
but let them discuss and try to implement and improve their ideas.

-- 

       __  __ __  __  _
|  | /  \  /  / |_  /  |/
\/\/ \__/ /_ /_ |__ \_ |\


Post a reply to this message

Copyright 2003-2023 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.