Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
> On 2/28/2016 12:58 PM, Bald Eagle wrote:
> > clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> >
> >> Trying to make POV-Ray more like the other popular renderers out there
> >> in order to attract more users would actually achieve the very opposite.
> >> They have a much greater share of the "market", they have a long head
> >> start in what they are doing, and I'd also guess that they have a lot
> >> more manpower at their disposal.
> >>
> >> If we don't want POV-Ray to die out, we must keep doing things our own
> >> way, and hope it will keep filling a niche.
> >>
> >>
> >> Of course that shouldn't stop us from looking at what others are doing,
> >> and let them inspire ourselves. But blindly imitating them -- that would
> >> be POV-Ray's end.
> >
> > Yes, that was my unspoken thought.
> > "If you want to win, then do what the other guy _can't_ do.
> > POV-Ray has survived THIS long doing exactly what it does - better than any
> > other renderer - so, stick with what ya know.   :)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> It is a niche program, PovRay is historic and follows a vision. It is a
> standard that other renderers can be measured against.
> It is almost a religious tenet to keep PovRay as it is only better.
>
> LanuHum and Mr are doing stalwart work in integrating PovRay into
> Blender. Which for people, like me, makes it possible to still use Pov
> as my renderer.
>
> --
>
> Regards
>      Stephen

We need people to work on the Moray codebase.  I remember a call several years
ago for people to do code cleanup and rip out the proprietary and
platform-dependent stuff.

I would help if there was anything I could do, but my programming skills need a
lot of work.

I have done some interface design in Qt Widgets, and I've been thinking about
exploring JUCE Toolkit.  Both would be good options for the project.

I'd be willing to discuss if anyone thinks I could be of use.

Regards,
A.D.B.

Post a reply to this message