On Fri, 14 Feb 2003 13:18:50 +0100, Thomas Willhalm
<tho### [at] uni-konstanzde> wrote:
> No, I never wanted to say that. That's why I wrote:
> "Either your personal opinion is in conflict with the
> majority of the POV-Team..."
>
> I am aware of the fact that Thorsten and not the POV-Team is answering,
> and Thorsten answered accordingly by pointing out where his opinion
> differs from other POV-Team members.

How it can make the progress better nowadays? Does Thorsten's explanation
changed meaning of http://mac.povray.org/support/status.html ? If not the
whole discussion is a waste of time when 3.51 is coming.

> > IMO this disccusion follows wrong way. It seems that only argument to make
> > open development for POV 4.0 is that Thorsten is in contradiction to the
> > rest of the POV-Team. 
>
> Sorry, I don't think I understand this sentence. Are you saying that
> in my opinion ...

That's the problem, please not make such discussions "you said ... that I said
... but I said ...". Please find "you" in quoted text. Then please find text
"this discussion" :-)

> > I do not see any argument like:
> > - look at this project - it moved to Open Source and community, stability
> > and quality increased
>
> Well, my list of open source projects that are in my opinion valuable
> comes close to this.

Show us the list of those projects. Show us the list of designers, maintainers
and fixed / not fixed bugs there.

> > - look at this dead raytracing project - it has some good ideas in C++
>
> I did something similar: Look at these papers about fur, they look 
> interesting, here is my current implementation. Unfortunately, nobody 
> else was interested.

I do not remember this. Which post of
http://news.povray.org/search/advanced/?s=%22Thomas+Willhalm%22&&a=1
contain link to your papers ?

> As I already said, my questions are answered and in my opinion we can
> move on now (although I really wished the POV 4.0 age would start
> soon and rumors about it could stop).

I wish it too. If it only could be done the way that MegaPOV is taking role of
bugfixer so Team can concern on making rules for 4.0...

ABX

Post a reply to this message