 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 20:11:30 +0200, John VanSickle
<evi### [at] hotmail com> wrote:
> > What is the current status of POV-Ray development?
>
> The other day Thorsten typed out some new code and compiled it.
Depending what you mean as 'new code'. IIRC 3.5.1 is supposed to be bugfix
release rather than set of new features.
> That's all you need to know.
Believe or not, but anwers are not that simple as questions :-)
Lack of answers can mean either inactivity and activity. This is the later.
Is there something in current 3.5 which breaks rendering of next 528 frames
for you? Tell me and I will try to help you.
ABX
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3f6ed7b2$1@news.povray.org>,
"Tom Melly" <tom### [at] tomandlucouk> wrote:
> A short webpage somewhere just outlining the POV development process, an
> explanation that 3.51 is a bugfix, and a couple of paras on pov 4 (explaining
> that it'll be a complete rewrite and why) - basically just enough to answer
> the faqs regarding pov development.
Something a bit like this:
http://news.povray.org/povray.announce.frequently-asked-questions/16712/
Except for talking about the 3.5 release in future tense? ;-)
I agree that some kind of regular official announcement would be nice.
Biannual or annual, or on every non-trivial release...3 years is kind of
a long time to wait between status reports.
--
Christopher James Huff <cja### [at] earthlinknet>
http://home.earthlink.net/~cjameshuff/
POV-Ray TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg
http://tag.povray.org/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
ABX wrote:
>
> Is there something in current 3.5 which breaks rendering of next 528
> frames for you? Tell me and I will try to help you.
Thanks, but I'm good. Since that post I've rendered 96 more frames (4
seconds of animation), and 240 more frames are in the queue now.
I still have at least four more shots to lay out and render after that.
Regards,
John
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I'm probably gonna get flamed off the face of the planet for saying this,
but (surely?) it would be simple enough to put a few lines on the POV-Ray
website that just say something like "we are currently working on POV-Ray
3.51, which will fix a few minor bugs from 3.5; there is currently no
particular target release date for this".
I'm sure a few people would still ask *exactly* where we're at, but I would
imagine this would be enough for most casual observers. Certainly it would
be an improvement on hearing *nothing*...
Just my humble opinion... don't hurt me too much. (".)
Thanks.
Andrew.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3f76e80b$1@news.povray.org> , "Andrew Coppin"
<orp### [at] btinternetcom> wrote:
> I'm sure a few people would still ask *exactly* where we're at, but I would
> imagine this would be enough for most casual observers. Certainly it would
> be an improvement on hearing *nothing*...
Nothing? Doesn't the "What's New" section on the main page make it clear
enough that POV-Ray isn't "dead" just because we don't make promises we
cannot keep for years like other projects; and which comment on all the
things they want to do and then only release one alpha version after the
other every month like for example the Mozilla project has been doing for
the last five years now?
Thorsten
____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
e-mail: tho### [at] trfde
Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> > I'm sure a few people would still ask *exactly* where we're at, but I
would
> > imagine this would be enough for most casual observers. Certainly it
would
> > be an improvement on hearing *nothing*...
>
> Nothing? Doesn't the "What's New" section on the main page make it clear
> enough that POV-Ray isn't "dead" just because we don't make promises we
> cannot keep for years like other projects; and which comment on all the
> things they want to do and then only release one alpha version after the
> other every month like for example the Mozilla project has been doing for
> the last five years now?
I know nothing about Mozilla (although the name is familiar). I appreciate
that no-one knows when the next version will be finished - I've written
programs too, and it's pointless saying "it will be finished by X", because
it probably won't be.
The "what's new" section makes it pretty clear that there are plenty of
people still using POV-Ray. It just doesn't say what the current development
status is. Ever since 3.5 came out, I've been wondering what the score is:
Are the developers knackered after making 3.5, and so taking some time out
and waiting to see if any more bugs are found?
Are they still developing bugfixes for the minor things that slipped past?
Are they working on a magor new release?
As of today, I have some idea what the answer it; was just supprised it
didn't say so anyway, given that this is a VERY frequently asked question. I
just thought a small notice stating what the current direction is would have
cleared that up. But hey, I don't run the website ;-)
Thanks.
Andrew.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3f774065$1@news.povray.org>, orp### [at] btinternetcom says...
> The "what's new" section makes it pretty clear that there are plenty of
> people still using POV-Ray. It just doesn't say what the current development
> status is. Ever since 3.5 came out, I've been wondering what the score is:
I know this feeling, or did until I found the news groups and started
reading them every day. There was definitely a scary period there
though... lol
> Are the developers knackered after making 3.5, and so taking some time out
> and waiting to see if any more bugs are found?
Yes.
> Are they still developing bugfixes for the minor things that slipped past?
Yes.
> Are they working on a magor new release?
Not until they are sure 3.5 is more or less bugless.
All this and more can be found by actually reading these news groups. ;)
However, there is admittedly nothing on the web site about it. They say
this is intentional and helpful from their stand point, but...
--
void main () {
call functional_code()
else
call crash_windows();
}
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thorsten Froehlich wrote:
> For example this from the current change log. Without knowing what was
> actually changed, most of the information is essentially useless,
> especially for a non-programmer:
>
> Change 2187 on 2003/08/25 by thorsten@host27
> Changes a few casts
> Removes pointless use of floating-point math
> Enables beta message
> Some error message text changes to match rest of code
> Renames a statistics enum to avoid a name confusion
> Other little tweaks
> [...]
> POVMSIEEEFloatToPOVMSFloat and HexToPOVMSIEEEFloat
> have to be redefined.
>
HEY! I think this IS useful.
If that was the complete change log, then please check these patches:
http://www.cip.physik.uni-muenchen.de/~wwieser/render/povray/patches.html
(The third one may probably not be an option and the "parametric
object patch" should be fixed.)
Wolfgang
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3f904280@news.povray.org> , Wolfgang Wieser <wwi### [at] gmxde>
wrote:
> If that was the complete change log
Did you notice the change numbers and dates?
Thorsten
____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
e-mail: tho### [at] trfde
Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
