clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
...
> There are a few reasons contributing to this:
>
> * Including a 3rd-party patch into POV-Ray proper requires the patch to
> be fairly stable, and play well with POV-Ray's traditional features.
> (MC-Pov, for instance, doesn't; for example you can't use both MC-Pov's
> features and conventional light sources at the same time, and MC-Pov's
> diffuse illumination gives significantly different results than
> radiosity due to an error in MC-Pov's math.)
>
> * Including a 3rd-party patch into POV-Ray proper requires some member
> of the dev team to "adopt" the feature for future maintenance (or the
> 3rd-party author to credibly commit themselves to future maintenance of
> the feature as part of POV-Ray proper).
>
> * Including a 3rd-party patch into POV-Ray proper requires the patch to
> be compatible with the internal architecture of whatever POV-Ray version
> is currently "in the making"; this is especially a problem with the
> transition from 3.6 to 3.7, which not only changed major portions of the
> architecture, but also took quite a lot of time.
>
> * Including a 3rd-party patch into POV-Ray proper requires the dev team
> to feel that the patch would make a good addition to POV-Ray's portfolio
> of features, without adding too much overhead in case the feature isn't
> used.

OK that makes sense!

tnx,
Holger

Post a reply to this message