-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Christoph Hormann wrote:
| Neither HDR-Image support nor Renderman like shaders could be
| implemented as 'plugins' in current official POV-Ray even if it had
| plugin support and even if POV-Ray was a Windows-only program.
|
| And there are reasons why MegaPOV currently does not include the POVMan
| patch and exactly the same reasons would prevent a POVMan plugin (that
| would not be possible anyway - see above) from being available.
|
| So the idea that a plugin system would allow you to use two arbitrary
| patches that have not yet been combined in an unofficial version
| together without getting your hands dirty is not realistic.
|
	All right so my example wasn't perfect. I suppose you won't like the
next either since both patches are available together in megapov now:
clothray and mechsim. There was  time when those two where completely
separate patches and couldn't be used together. Plugins would have
made that possible (and would have removed the requirement for someone
to spend time integrating the two together, so that person could have
spend his time working on new features/enhancements).

	Moreover, image formats could be implemented as plugins although not
with the solutions I suggested; and renderman-like surface shaders
could be implemented with what I said (just like any texture/pattern
could) so you could use both together, just by taking the HDRI patch
and the renderman plugin.

| Just to avoid wrong conclusions.  The idea that POV-Ray 4.0 will have a
| changed license does not mean it will have a do-whatever-you-want
| license.  And to make it possible for people to distribute platform
| specific binary-only extensions is not exactly a very good reason to
| change the license.
|
	I didn't say it would have a "do-whatever-you-want license", nor did
I say that it should, nor that it would/should make it possible to
distribute binary-only extensions. The license could include a
provision stating that any code linked against the POV core should
follow certain restrictions like be open source and available for
free. This would allow more freedom than the current "patches-only"
model while keeping all pov-related code free.

		Jerome
- --
******************************
*      Jerome M. Berger      *
* mailto:jbe### [at] ifrancecom *
*  http://jeberger.free.fr/  *
******************************
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFCDw7fqIYJdJhyixIRArX+AJ9Xd62qOa63hHGBocpREUCYvy074wCfVL91
b0Ox/F9L/XZmAVTgPhbmzqY=
=bcZJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Post a reply to this message