Dennis Clarke <dcl### [at] interlogcom> wrote:
: There has not been an official release of POV-Ray for
: Sun Solaris in how long?  A year?  Two?  The current version for SunOS or UNIX on
the
: "Official" POV-Ray web site is so out of date that I am surprised that it is there
at all.

  Who cares anyways? I have the latest povray (ie. 3.1g) compiled for the
sparcstation (works fine in the Ultra-5 computers I have access to; besides
this sparcstation 4 I'm using right now, that is).
  Yes, I compiled it myself. No big deal. It was easy.

  Btw: Consider stopping posting multipart mime-coded articles to non-binaries
groups. Thanks.

-- 
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):5;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 03 Sep 1999 03:26:13 -0400, Dennis Clarke wrote:
>This is a cryptographically signed message in MIME format.
>
>--------------msFE68DA7EBF8D41907B9C7935
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
>Ken wrote:
>
>>  The issue is not so much one of just getting someone to compile the most
>> recent version and pop it onto the pov home page. Once they decide they
>> will add support for a new platform they obligate themselves not only to
>> the end user but also ethically to themselves to continue support for that
>> platform. Just about anyone with access to a Sparc, UltraSparc can throw
>> together a working compile of Pov but who is going to continue supporting
>> that platform ?
>
>What difference does it make?   Really?  Ask that question out loud and then go look
at
>the "Official SunOS binaries" on the www.povray.org website.  While you are there,
look at
>the text on the page ...  "SunOS version (version 3.02, not yet updated to 3.1)".

Actually, there's another reason the team can't just get someone to build 
a SunOS version and send it to them: it might not be just a straightforward 
compile.  There might be problems with the port that would need to be 
resolved by someone who understands the OS it's running on.  I seem to 
recall that the team was looking for a member who could do SunOS work
about a year ago, long before I was asked to join.  The lack of a current
SunOS version is not for lack of _wanting_ one, it's for lack of someone
who was willing to commit to the amount of very real work that's required
to build a working version and stand behind it.

>Again, ask the question.  What difference does it make if you support the build on
Solaris
>at all.  It is NOT supported now.  There has not been an official release of POV-Ray
for
>Sun Solaris in how long?  A year?  Two?  The current version for SunOS or UNIX on the
>"Official" POV-Ray web site is so out of date that I am surprised that it is there at
all.

There are still 3.0 and earlier versions for other operating systems too.  Just
because they're obsolete doesn't mean they're any less official.

>This is lip-service.  There is no need to buy a HP9000 system to build POV-Ray for
HPUX. 
>There is no need to buy a Sun Ultra 2300 for UltraSparc and Solaris 8.  (The
pre-release
>for Solaris 8 is out)  Look at the size and number of the POV-Ray user community.  I
would
>hazard to guess that most POV-Ray users are serious computer professionals.  How do
you
>think that Linux bacame what it is today?  By allowing many people to participate in
the
>open source concept and by using the talents of your vast user community.  

True, to a point.  If you want to build the current source and contribute any
source patches back to the team, there's nothing keeping you from doing that.
There's also nothing keeping you from compiling a custom version and 
distributing it.  But I hope you understand how someone wouldn't want to stand 
behind and support a distribution that they couldn't even run, let alone test.


>> Chris Cason supports
>> the windows version and probably the dos version as well, Thorsten Frolich

Actually, Ken, I believe Chris Young is in charge of the DOS version.

>If anyone wants my build, they can send an email and ask for it.  No problem. 

If it's not too big, I'd be happy to host a binary on my website, such as it
is.

>  Long term support is a myth.  It is a lie that marketing people say to customers
just
>before they drop the technology.  Welcome to modern business.  

That's one of the differences between business and open source, isn't it?

>I may be dead next week.  I may step out in front of a truck.  Any organization of
people
>that depends on a few individuals to maintain a product, is doomed.

Even if the entire POV-Team got wiped out tomorrow in some global catastrophic 
accident, I'm sure someone dedicated could sort out the resulting minor legal 
mess and carry on the work.  But there's a kernel of truth to what you say: as
I understand it, the reason there's not a 3.1 SunOS build is that the person on
the team who was doing SunOS left to pursue other interests.  Last I heard, the
position was still open.

Also, I get the impression that you think I'm speaking for the team here.  While
I'm a member of the team, I don't presume to speak for them.  That's Chris 
Young's job.  I'm just stating my opinions, which would be roughly the same even
if I weren't a member of the team.

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 03 Sep 1999 04:18:11 -0400, Dennis Clarke wrote:
>Well, I've had the opportunity to discuss some of these issues with at least one of
the
>team members.

But not in an official capacity.  If you want to discuss this with someone 
official, you should send mail to the official Team contact address.  If
you would like to commit to providing a SunOS build and the concomitant 
support, I'm sure someone would be happy to talk to you about what kind
of long-term responsibility is involved.  But I'm not that person.

Post a reply to this message

Ron Parker wrote:

> Also, I get the impression that you think I'm speaking for the team here.  While
> I'm a member of the team, I don't presume to speak for them.  That's Chris
> Young's job.  I'm just stating my opinions, which would be roughly the same even
> if I weren't a member of the team.

Your a member of the team now ? I'll be darned !

-- 
Ken Tyler

See my 850+ Povray and 3D Rendering and Raytracing Links at:
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 03 Sep 1999 07:13:14 -0700, Ken wrote:
>Ron Parker wrote:
>
>> Also, I get the impression that you think I'm speaking for the team here.  While
>> I'm a member of the team, I don't presume to speak for them.  That's Chris
>> Young's job.  I'm just stating my opinions, which would be roughly the same even
>> if I weren't a member of the team.
>
>Your a member of the team now ? I'll be darned !

I was wondering how long it would take to get that reaction.  I alluded to it
back during the vcard flamewar, too, but it went unnoticed.  I've been trying
to keep it quiet so y'all won't treat me differently. :)

Post a reply to this message

Ron Parker wrote:

> I was wondering how long it would take to get that reaction.  I alluded to it
> back during the vcard flamewar, too, but it went unnoticed.  I've been trying
> to keep it quiet so y'all won't treat me differently. :)

It took less than four minuets by my count Mr. Parker Sir. :)

-- 
Ken Tyler

See my 850+ Povray and 3D Rendering and Raytracing Links at:
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 03 Sep 1999 07:18:40 -0700, Ken wrote:
>
>
>Ron Parker wrote:
>
>> I was wondering how long it would take to get that reaction.  I alluded to it
>> back during the vcard flamewar, too, but it went unnoticed.  I've been trying
>> to keep it quiet so y'all won't treat me differently. :)
>
>It took less than four minuets by my count Mr. Parker Sir. :)

You were dancing while reading news?  Now I *AM* impressed.

By my count, it took a couple of weeks since I first mentioned it, and a
couple of months since the authentication header first started appearing 
in my postings.

Post a reply to this message

Ron Parker wrote:
> 
> >It took less than four minuets by my count Mr. Parker Sir. :)
> 
> You were dancing while reading news?  Now I *AM* impressed.
> 

ROTFL!!!

Margus

Post a reply to this message

Ron Parker wrote:

> By my count, it took a couple of weeks since I first mentioned it, and a
> couple of months since the authentication header first started appearing
> in my postings.

I keep the headers minimized. I don't like looking at all of the junk unless
I choose to. Congratulations are in order I suppose. What is your official
function with the team ? I suppose for the most part it is advice where
patch integration is concerned and bug chasing. Close ?

-- 
Ken Tyler

See my 850+ Povray and 3D Rendering and Raytracing Links at:
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 03 Sep 1999 07:36:56 -0700, Ken wrote:
>
>
>Ron Parker wrote:
>
>> By my count, it took a couple of weeks since I first mentioned it, and a
>> couple of months since the authentication header first started appearing
>> in my postings.
>
>I keep the headers minimized. I don't like looking at all of the junk unless
>I choose to. Congratulations are in order I suppose. What is your official
>function with the team ? I suppose for the most part it is advice where
>patch integration is concerned and bug chasing. Close ?

Thanks!  I'm doing Windows-y stuff, mainly.  I shouldn't talk about the other 
stuff.  That's how rumors get started. :)

Post a reply to this message