 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Francois LE COAT wrote:
> Why should it be promoted rather than any other OS ?
Market share.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Crate & Barrel -
Furnishing Video Games Since 1962!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tim Cook wrote:
> Be glad they're releasing anything at all, for starters. If they were
> being paid, they might be obligated to do certain things. But they're
> not. Got a problem with it? Write your own raytracer.
That's actually quite misleading. POV-Ray is open to everyone
interested to use and improve it. The fact that the beta is currently
only available for a single platform does not mean you can't get
involved with improving POV-Ray when on a different platform.
And just to once again make this clear (although it has been mentioned
several times already): The 3.7 beta is not yet near being ready for
production use.
Christoph
--
POV-Ray tutorials, include files, Landscape of the week:
http://www.imagico.de/ (Last updated 31 Oct. 2005)
MegaPOV with mechanics simulation: http://megapov.inetart.net/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
in news:43e6098f@news.povray.org Chris Cason wrote:
> The new render window is designed to help users get around the issue
> of the render window getting in the way when doing edit/render/fix
> cycles.
Nice feature, thanks Chris.
Ingo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"ingo" <ing### [at] tag povrayorg> wrote in message
news:Xns9761CFADD3F36seed7@news.povray.org...
> in news:43e6098f@news.povray.org Chris Cason wrote:
>
>> The new render window
>
> Nice feature
Definitely. I'll second that thankyou.
If I may suggest something... it might be best to leave it opaque initially
even when set to shift to semi-transparent, that way it could be seen
normally when a render is started. I'm thinking this because it might make
test renders difficult to see correctly, also if intended to let it finish
without further editing, Otherwise the setting, or placement of cursor
(lacking a scroll wheel), needs changing in the menu to keep opacity for
those situations so it just makes more sense to me that it be opaque at the
onset of a render and only be semi-transparent thereafter when focusing on
the editor at some time.
Bob Hughes
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Francois LE COAT wrote:
> Hi Tim,
>
> Tim Cook wrote :
>> Be glad they're releasing anything at all, for starters. If they were
>> being paid, they might be obligated to do certain things. But they're
>> not. Got a problem with it? Write your own raytracer.
>
> I'm not speaking about my personal interest, but about general policy.
> I'm supporting POV for more than 10 years now. Specially on ATARI
> platforms. Do you know that Windows is *the* latest non Unix OS ?
> Why should it be promoted rather than any other OS ?
>
> Regards,
>
> Author of Eureka 2.12 (2D Graph Describer, 3D Modeller)
> http://eureka.atari.org
It's not being promoted. The POV-Team is focusing on fixing bugs
related to the new feature (multithreading). To minimize distractions
from this, they have decided to focus on a single platform for the
development.
They could do source releases and focus on implementing the changes only
in the generic code versions; however, due to past experiences the
POV-Team has decided that time-limited binaries better suit their needs
(and the community's).
Since they must do a binary release, on a single platform, they simply
chose the platform with the greatest number of users.
...Chambers
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Francois LE COAT" <lec### [at] atariorg> wrote in message
news:43e62a8f$1@news.povray.org...
> Hi,
>
> > POV-Ray 3.7.beta.11c is available from http://www.povray.org/beta/.
> >
> > This beta is currently for the Windows platform only and includes standard,
> > SSE2, and 64-bit binaries.
>
> That's a shame that POVRay beta is only available for Windows. My policy
> as a developer is to support Linux and MacOSX platforms ... I do regret
> that the POVTeam has the exact opposed policy :( Who benefit from it ?
POV-Ray is well-known for its multiple platform support. The overhead involved
in producing a compile for each platform that POV-Ray supports for each beta
release would be extreme, and is unnecessary for the testing process.
By restricting testing to just one platform it benefits the POV Team, as less
time is wasted producing various compiles every time a new beta is released,
which allows the development to progress more quickly, which ultimately benefits
all POV-Ray users. So in answer to your question regarding who benefits: all
POV-Ray users benefit in the end.
Lance.
thezone - thezone.firewave.com.au
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Lance Birch <-> wrote:
> POV-Ray is well-known for its multiple platform support. The overhead involved
> in producing a compile for each platform that POV-Ray supports for each beta
> release would be extreme, and is unnecessary for the testing process.
It's not just a question of compilation: Frontends need to be created
for each platform. Not a trivial task.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message news:43e8be8f@news.povray.org...
> Lance Birch <-> wrote:
> > POV-Ray is well-known for its multiple platform support. The overhead
involved
> > in producing a compile for each platform that POV-Ray supports for each beta
> > release would be extreme, and is unnecessary for the testing process.
>
> It's not just a question of compilation: Frontends need to be created
> for each platform. Not a trivial task.
Definitely. I'm simplifying things greatly - there is so much to do to create
each platform's release. I was just noting the time overhead involved for each
revision of the beta if you were to create one for each platform... compiling
for each platform (as it is, there are three compiles; 32-bit/32-bit
SSE2/64-bit), compressing the various platform compiles with their documentation
into separate archives, updating the website with the multiple platform compiles
and no doubt writing notes for each, and so on. It would probably take 5 times
as long just to organise the compiles for the revisions and get them on the
website, let alone the actual development involved. One release is complex
enough, and for the purposes of testing and debugging the new internals one
platform is all that is required (and choosing the platform with the largest
beta tester user base is common sense).
People seem to have forgotten this is a beta.
Lance.
thezone - thezone.firewave.com.au
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hi,
Lance Birch wrote :
> "Warp" wrote :
>> Lance Birch wrote:
>>> POV-Ray is well-known for its multiple platform support. The overhea
d involved
>>> in producing a compile for each platform that POV-Ray supports for ea
ch beta
>>> release would be extreme, and is unnecessary for the testing process.
>> It's not just a question of compilation: Frontends need to be create
d
>> for each platform. Not a trivial task.
>
> Definitely. I'm simplifying things greatly - there is so much to do to
create
> each platform's release. I was just noting the time overhead involved
for each
> revision of the beta if you were to create one for each platform... com
piling
> for each platform (as it is, there are three compiles; 32-bit/32-bit
> SSE2/64-bit), compressing the various platform compiles with their docu
mentation
> into separate archives, updating the website with the multiple platform
compiles
> and no doubt writing notes for each, and so on. It would probably take
5 times
> as long just to organise the compiles for the revisions and get them on
the
> website, let alone the actual development involved. One release is com
plex
> enough, and for the purposes of testing and debugging the new internals
one
> platform is all that is required (and choosing the platform with the la
rgest
> beta tester user base is common sense).
>
> People seem to have forgotten this is a beta.
I understand that a platform must be chosen to propose a beta version.
Otherwise it may be rather difficult to manage releases ... But why
is Windows chosen, knowing that it is the only OS that is non Unix ?
I can understand that there's much more beta testers under Windows,
because this system has a commercial dominant position. But this system
is also non compatible with every others !
If another system had been chosen, it would have been the best way to
port to others, and to have a representative implementation. You know
that POSIX threads are common to really a great amount of systems, if
it was the point ... Computing farms are running Unix systems ...
Windows is the worst choice to experiment a beta version. I always
personally ported POV starting from Linux sources anyway.
That's why I'm speaking of the way to "promote" Windows, which
sounds me to be the worst choice.
Regards,
Author of Eureka 2.12 (2D Graph Describer, 3D Modeller)
http://eureka.atari.org
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Francois LE COAT wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Lance Birch wrote :
>> People seem to have forgotten this is a beta.
>
> I understand that a platform must be chosen to propose a beta version.
> Otherwise it may be rather difficult to manage releases ... But why
> is Windows chosen, knowing that it is the only OS that is non Unix ?
Why do you worship Unix?
> I can understand that there's much more beta testers under Windows,
You just answered your above question.
> because this system has a commercial dominant position. But this system
> is also non compatible with every others !
Excuse me, but can you take a binary compiled for Mac OS X and run it
under Linux? Can you even run it under Yellow Dog Linux (compiled
specifically for the G5)? Can you run a Linux x86 binary and run it
under Sparc Solaris?
All of these systems are incompatible with all the others.
> If another system had been chosen, it would have been the best way to
> port to others, and to have a representative implementation.
Nobody is porting the betas to other systems, so this is a moot point.
Once the code base has stabilized, then the release of various ports
will begin.
Besides, all that is needed for a "representative implementation", would
be a representative sample of all POV users... the majority of which run
Windows...
> You know
> that POSIX threads are common to really a great amount of systems, if
> it was the point ...
Irrelevant...
> Computing farms are running Unix systems ...
... also irrelevant...
> Windows is the worst choice to experiment a beta version.
Why? The most users are on Windows.
> I always
> personally ported POV starting from Linux sources anyway.
What you do or do not do has no effect on the POV-Team.
> That's why I'm speaking of the way to "promote" Windows, which
> sounds me to be the worst choice.
They aren't "promoting" windows. If they were to say, "POV-Ray only
runs on Windows because it's the best OS out there!" then that would be
promoting Windows. Instead, they're saying, "We are releasing a buggy
and incomplete version of POV-Ray for testing purposes only on the
system which most POV-Ray users operate on." Hardly promotional
material, that.
>
> Regards,
Salutations,
...Chambers
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
