In article <pan### [at] uwaterlooca> , Andrew Clinton 
<ajc### [at] uwaterlooca>  wrote:

> True :) But it has been no less than 2 or 3 years since the POV-Team has
> announced the plan for a full rewrite.  During that time, I have only seen
> 2 really good discussions of potential design considerations for the new
> version of POV-Ray, each around 2 years ago, with some strong resistance
> to new ideas from many members of the POV-Team (Yes, I have been
> intermittently following the groups for that long!).

Then you fundamentally misunderstood the point we always made: We will not
discuss the design in public, and we do not endorse design discussions in
public either.  Every discussion about design ideas is just ignored,
regardless of what is being discussed.  As such, there is simply no judgment
at all made on any idea discussed in public.

The list of reasons to not endorse public design discussions is almost
endless, so whatever reasons you can think of why we would not do it are
probably on that list.  Oh, and if somebody cannot think of any reason on
that list, well, that would also be on the list! ;-)

    Thorsten

____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich
e-mail: mac### [at] povrayorg

I am a member of the POV-Ray Team.
Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org

Post a reply to this message