 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hi there,
I'd like to bring up the discussion about the unix-version for 3.1
again.
I have the feeling, that the povray-team is quite satisfied with the
existing unofficial versions of 3.1, as there are no statements
whatsoever as to when they would release something. They must have been
in a quite final state a while ago (talking about months), as the issued
the request for Solaris-maintainers, to which i weakly volunteered and
got no reply.
I really see only two reasons for the current timeframe:
1) Holydays. A really good one, I agree, but ...
2) Porting Delphi, just to bring the editor to the unix folks :-)
Anyway, I would propose putting one unofficial version in some kind of
'state of confidence', just to give all the patchers something to work
on. In my understanding, users as well as programmers are eagerly
waiting on a 'accepted' version, one version that is known throughout
the community. That would not necessarily be an official one.
Axel
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hi, Axel!
Yes, I'm waiting for an official UNIX version for POV 3.1, too. I think
there are two points that speak against the acceptance of an unofficial
version by the POVray team.
The first one would be the loss of control over their project. By
accepting it they would have to make it sure that the later release is
compatible to the accepted version so that any work by third parties
wouldn't be wasted.
The second point is that for such a semi-offcial version for sure bug
reports will be delivered to official POYray-team, which can be quite
annoying.
I believe the existing unofficial versions for LINUX should do until the
official version is released.
We shouldn't forget that POVray is a *free* program which means that the
people creating it don't see a buck for it, so that they have to earn
their living in other ways. I'm always astonished how I complex software
like povray (or linux) could be created in the spare time by people who
sure have still a life.
Well, this is my opinion. Yours may differ ;-)
Greetings,
Marc
--
Marc Schimmler
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hey guess what, they do :-)
To clarify the important thing:
I was not talking about the povray-team releasing something. I was
talking about an agreement between users on unix-platforms and patchers
on ONE unofficial version. This will lead into more or less trouble if
the povray-team releases something, but that's a more or less distant
(timely) problem.
Now on to the religious wars :-(. You brought up the term *free*.
Well....
Povray is 'free' of monetary charge. If it would be *free* in that .....
sense, the unix-versions might have been out before anything else (just
guessing, how many hackers don't contribute to Povray because of
religious license ideas).
Povray is not free free, but the povray-team owns the intellectual
property rights (put in here something more appropriate for lawyers).
And so, citing the german Grundgesetz, 'Eigentum verplichtet' (property
goes along with responsibility), I really think, the povray-team should
care about a unix-release. That is
either providing one or giving reasons for not doing so.
Axel
PS: If you'd like to respond to the second point, PLEASE, don't argue
about the license, concentrate on the last sentence, thanx.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hi Axel!
Axel Hecht wrote:
>
> Hey guess what, they do :-)
>
> To clarify the important thing:
> I was not talking about the povray-team releasing something. I was
> talking about an agreement between users on unix-platforms and patchers
> on ONE unofficial version. This will lead into more or less trouble if
> the povray-team releases something, but that's a more or less distant
> (timely) problem.
>
I fear that there is no real solution to that and the work done on
patches for this agreed unofficial version could be totally wasted. That
would be sad thing to do. Well the POVray team could be so nice and take
this into account when releasing their own official version but there is
no guarantee for that. You might try!
>
> Now on to the religious wars :-(. You brought up the term *free*.
>
No wars please!! Don't have time for that. :-)
> Well....
> Povray is 'free' of monetary charge. If it would be *free* in that .....
> sense, the unix-versions might have been out before anything else (just
> guessing, how many hackers don't contribute to Povray because of
> religious license ideas).
> Povray is not free free, but the povray-team owns the intellectual
> property rights (put in here something more appropriate for lawyers).
> And so, citing the german Grundgesetz, 'Eigentum verplichtet' (property
> goes along with responsibility), I really think, the povray-team should
> care about a unix-release. That is
> either providing one or giving reasons for not doing so.
>
Yes, they should care and I am sure they will! What I tried to say in my
last response is that the POVray-Team is spending their spare time for
this project. This is to my opinion a high sacrifice.
I think they first cared for the Windows platform because this is what
most of the user are using (and maybe they use it too). I fear that the
supporters of UNIX platform are few in the team and there is a lot of
work to do (especially the editor in 3.1).
I believe it would be a good idea to ask them directly in a polite way
what's up. I'am sure that they are open to your reasonable request
(well, I think it is reasonable).
Greetings to my hometown,
Marc
--
Marc Schimmler
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Marc Schimmler <sch### [at] ica uni-stuttgartde> writes:
>
> I think they first cared for the Windows platform because this is what
> most of the user are using (and maybe they use it too). I fear that the
> supporters of UNIX platform are few in the team and there is a lot of
> work to do (especially the editor in 3.1).
I honestly hope that they don't waste their time in porting the Windows
editor to Unix. I think that everyone who uses Unix has his/her own
favorite editor. Furthermore, Unix users are used to the command line
and ASCII configuration files. They don't need a nice GUI, but want the
new features of POV-Ray 3.1 (and the source code :-) ).
However, I might totally wrong.
Thomas
--
http://www.fmi.uni-konstanz.de/~willhalm
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas Willhalm wrote:
>
>
> I honestly hope that they don't waste their time in porting the Windows
> editor to Unix. I think that everyone who uses Unix has his/her own
> favorite editor. Furthermore, Unix users are used to the command line
> and ASCII configuration files. They don't need a nice GUI, but want the
> new features of POV-Ray 3.1 (and the source code :-) ).
>
Well, It's true for me. I would never leave my emacs! ;-)
Marc
--
Marc Schimmler
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>goes along with responsibility), I really think, the povray-team should
>care about a unix-release. That is either providing one or giving reasons
>for not doing so.
we care about it. it's just that the two persons who are doing the two unix
ports have not as yet completed their work. when it's done it's done ...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
povray.org admin team <new### [at] DESPAMpovrayorg> wrote:
: we care about it. it's just that the two persons who are doing the two unix
: ports have not as yet completed their work. when it's done it's done ...
It should be nice to know, what's making so much work with the unix port.
I thought that except for the X-window version, the whole povray code is
totally portable ANSI C code, which can be compiled as is. And since the
X-window code already exists from pov 3.0, why isn't it possible to just
take the same code to 3.1?
If the core program of povray is ANSI C, what's the problem with porting
to unix?
--
main(i){char*_="BdsyFBThhHFBThhHFRz]NFTITQF|DJIFHQhhF";while(i=
*_++)for(;i>1;printf("%s",i-70?i&1?"[]":" ":(i=0,"\n")),i/=2);} /*- Warp. -*/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nieminen Mika wrote:
> I thought that except for the X-window version, the whole povray code is
> totally portable ANSI C code, which can be compiled as is. And since the
> X-window code already exists from pov 3.0, why isn't it possible to just
> take the same code to 3.1?
(It's two weeks later, nothing new has happened...the world still awaits an
offical unix / xwindows povray 3.1)
Yeah, why? Indeed, several people have already done this privately, and AFIK it
didn't take any one of them more than part of a day. To wit, Ron Parker
did this a couple months ago. That inspired me to try it myself, and it took
only about one hour. (Couldn't have done my color dispersion patch w/o it.)
Someone else also did this, announced it in either this newsgroup or the
.programming one.
We just need to make one of our unofficial x-window hacks more widel
available, as binaries, for all the non-programmers. What's keeping the
POV-Team from just doing it themselves?
I fear they are adding some fancy complicated feature - a text editor - that
most of us unix/linux users won't ever use. Adding a text editor would be
foolish. I love nedit, and will never consider using any other editor (though
as a practical matter I use the email editor provided in Netscape). There are
many unixes who love emacs (or vi or pico) and would never give it up or use
anything else.
OTOH, I wouldn't mind a dialog for all the rendering settings, just click a
button for a quick render, click another for a final image, etc. but such a
thing shouldn't be added into the POV-Ray code, not even in the x-windows
specific subdirectory. The approach of XFPovray is best - anyone can make
their own front end.
Maybe they've got something totally different up their sleeves?
Daren Scot Wilson
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
dar### [at] pipelinecom wrote:
: Maybe they've got something totally different up their sleeves?
I hope that it's something so great it's worth the waiting...
--
main(i){char*_="BdsyFBThhHFBThhHFRz]NFTITQF|DJIFHQhhF";while(i=
*_++)for(;i>1;printf("%s",i-70?i&1?"[]":" ":(i=0,"\n")),i/=2);} /*- Warp. -*/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Linux Users:
I just found this news group and wanted to let you in on the status
of the Linux release of POV 3.1. About the time that the initial
version 3.1 releases appeared, I started using linux in a partition on my
PC. I talked about it some in the Compuserve POVRAY forum and since
Chris Young is familiar with my use of POV-Ray over the past few years,
he asked me if I would like to be the Linux support team member. I said
yes without realizing how much effort would be required to get up to speed
with Linux while at the same time working full time and carrying a
Graduate Engineering course. I still intend to get an official Linux
version out as soon as possible, and now have the time to work on it, or
rather work on learning enough Linux to create the port. My intention
is to make the initial release of POVLinux version 3.1 be a
straightforward adaptation from the version 3.02 release. I suspect that
this should not take very long to do, but I don't want to mess it up due
to inexperience with Linux. I noticed that Mark Gordon has released an
unofficial version, and have looked at his web site. I am impressed
with the effort he took to follow the rules for an unofficial release,
and am going to look at his version and intend to stay as compatible as
possible with it while developing the official release.
Also, I have been reading your comments and will definitely keep them
in mind during my effort. I have no intention of developing an editor for
POVLinux since as you have said each unix user has his own favorite. I
noticed someone mentioned nedit which is my favorite as well.
Now that I have found this haven for POV enthusiasts on the internet,
I intend to keep in touch, but will likely be infrequent until the
official release in ready for you to look at.
Axel Hecht wrote:
> Hi there,
> I'd like to bring up the discussion about the unix-version for 3.1
> again.
> I have the feeling, that the povray-team is quite satisfied with the
> existing unofficial versions of 3.1, as there are no statements
> whatsoever as to when they would release something. They must have been
> in a quite final state a while ago (talking about months), as the issued
> the request for Solaris-maintainers, to which i weakly volunteered and
> got no reply.
> I really see only two reasons for the current timeframe:
> 1) Holydays. A really good one, I agree, but ...
> 2) Porting Delphi, just to bring the editor to the unix folks :-)
>
> Anyway, I would propose putting one unofficial version in some kind of
> 'state of confidence', just to give all the patchers something to work
> on. In my understanding, users as well as programmers are eagerly
> waiting on a 'accepted' version, one version that is known throughout
> the community. That would not necessarily be an official one.
>
> Axel
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I would like to say a big THANK YOU for your efforts and also for
clearing statements!!!
You should be able to get a lot of support here if any problem with the
port should arise (well, it's true for me it I think it's true for all
the other linux and unix users of POVray).
Happy new year!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
George Ganoe wrote:
> ...without realizing how much effort would be required to get up to speed
> with Linux while at the same time working full time and carrying a
> Graduate Engineering course.
Yow!
If Official POV-Ray Linux Supporter were an elected position, here's my
campaign speech:
I work at a "full time" job, but really put in an average of four days a
week, and take no classes. I have two years intensive experience with
Linux. I have already ported POV-Ray 3.1a to Linux. My computer uses
24-bit color at 1024x768. I have a mustache. Vote for me, and free
chocolate ice cream for everyone!
George, are you the one and only offical POV-Team member using Linux?
Are they "hiring"? Are you sure you can pull it off along with your
other obligations? I know at least three people (including myself) who
would love to help with the Linux version.
--
Daren Scot Wilson
dar### [at] pipelinecom
www.newcolor.com
----
"A ship in a harbor is safe, but that is not what ships are built for"
-- William Shedd
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I suppose "linux" means here the same as "unix".
Not everyone here is using linux, you know...
pikkusirkku:~>uname -a
SunOS pikkusirkku 5.5.1 Generic_103640-24 sun4m sparc SUNW,SPARCstation-5
assari:~>uname -a
OSF1 assari V4.0 1091 alpha
--
main(i){char*_="BdsyFBThhHFBThhHFRz]NFTITQF|DJIFHQhhF";while(i=
*_++)for(;i>1;printf("%s",i-70?i&1?"[]":" ":(i=0,"\n")),i/=2);} /*- Warp. -*/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I'll sign up for the iced cream:)
Steve
Daren Scot Wilson wrote:
>
> George Ganoe wrote:
> > ...without realizing how much effort would be required to get up to speed
> > with Linux while at the same time working full time and carrying a
> > Graduate Engineering course.
>
> Yow!
>
> If Official POV-Ray Linux Supporter were an elected position, here's my
> campaign speech:
>
> I work at a "full time" job, but really put in an average of four days a
> week, and take no classes. I have two years intensive experience with
> Linux. I have already ported POV-Ray 3.1a to Linux. My computer uses
> 24-bit color at 1024x768. I have a mustache. Vote for me, and free
> chocolate ice cream for everyone!
>
> George, are you the one and only offical POV-Team member using Linux?
> Are they "hiring"? Are you sure you can pull it off along with your
> other obligations? I know at least three people (including myself) who
> would love to help with the Linux version.
>
> --
> Daren Scot Wilson
> dar### [at] pipelinecom
> www.newcolor.com
> ----
> "A ship in a harbor is safe, but that is not what ships are built for"
> -- William Shedd
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Glad to hear it! Of course, the ice cream has to funded from campaing
contributions...<g>
Stephen Lavedas wrote:
>
> I'll sign up for the iced cream:)
>
> Daren Scot Wilson wrote:
> >
> > If Official POV-Ray Linux Supporter were an elected position, here's my
> > campaign speech:
> >
> > I work at a "full time" job, but really put in an average of four days a
> > week, and take no classes. I have two years intensive experience with
> > Linux. I have already ported POV-Ray 3.1a to Linux. My computer uses
> > 24-bit color at 1024x768. I have a mustache. Vote for me, and free
> > chocolate ice cream for everyone!
--
Daren Scot Wilson
dar### [at] pipelinecom
www.newcolor.com
----
"A ship in a harbor is safe, but that is not what ships are built for"
-- William Shedd
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Daren Scot Wilson wrote:
> ...
>
> George, are you the one and only offical POV-Team member using Linux?
> Are they "hiring"?
Apparently I am the only POV Team member who is using Linux and is aregular in
the Compuserve POVRAY forum. As for hiring, I would
appreciate all of the help I can get.
> Are you sure you can pull it off along with your
> other obligations? I know at least three people (including myself) who
> would love to help with the Linux version.
As far as being able to pull it off, I guess I have to since the rest of theteam
is counting on me to get a Linux distribution released. Since the POV
teams home is on Compuserve, and there is a real scarcity of unix users there,
I intend to try and act as a liason between the team and the unix community
of users who interact here.
I am going to try and set up a mailing list for Linux (unix) POV users who
are interested in helping with the development necessary to keep their version
current. I am concentrating primarily on the Linux release, since that is what
I use, but with the source for that, most unix users can create a runable build
for their own systems. Anyone who would be interested in helping is welcome to
email me and I will consider putting you on the mailing list assuming I can get
one started.
George
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
George Ganoe wrote:
> Since the POV teams home is on Compuserve....
Isn't it severely limiting itself by confining its membership thus?
The vast majority of programming and raytracing talent isn't on
Compuserve.
Dan
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Dan Connelly wrote:
> George Ganoe wrote:
> > Since the POV teams home is on Compuserve....
>
> Isn't it severely limiting itself by confining its membership thus?
>
> The vast majority of programming and raytracing talent isn't on
> Compuserve.
>
> Dan
Compuserve has been POV-Ray's home since its beginning. I think
the long time members feel more at home there, and are used to
the mode of operations available to them there. There are some
features of Compuserve that don't exist to my knowledge on the
internet which are useful to the team.
You may be right that the majority of networked programming and
raytracing is currently on the internet, but when POV started,
Compuserve had more users than the internet.
George
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
George Ganoe wrote:
>
> Compuserve has been POV-Ray's home since its beginning. I think
> the long time members feel more at home there, and are used to
> the mode of operations available to them there. There are some
> features of Compuserve that don't exist to my knowledge on the
> internet which are useful to the team.
>
> You may be right that the majority of networked programming and
> raytracing is currently on the internet, but when POV started,
> Compuserve had more users than the internet.
>
> George
Without putting down what you say too much but many a
comapany has gone out of business because of the attitude
"we have always done it like that why change now".
--
Ken Tyler
tyl### [at] pacbellnet
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ken wrote:
...
> Without putting down what you say too much but many a
> comapany has gone out of business because of the attitude
> "we have always done it like that why change now".
>
> --
> Ken Tyler
>
> tyl### [at] pacbellnet
Fortunately, few of us are here for the money.
-Mark R.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mark Radosevich wrote:
>
> Fortunately, few of us are here for the money.
>
> -Mark R.
I was generalizing.
--
Ken Tyler
tyl### [at] pacbellnet
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ken <tyl### [at] pacbellnet> wrote:
>George Ganoe wrote:
>
>>
>> Compuserve has been POV-Ray's home since its beginning. I think
>> the long time members feel more at home there, and are used to
>> the mode of operations available to them there. There are some
>> features of Compuserve that don't exist to my knowledge on the
>> internet which are useful to the team.
>>
>> You may be right that the majority of networked programming and
>> raytracing is currently on the internet, but when POV started,
>> Compuserve had more users than the internet.
>>
>> George
>
>Without putting down what you say too much but many a
>comapany has gone out of business because of the attitude
>"we have always done it like that why change now".
Compuserve provides us with a comfortable and private environment with which we
are all comfortable. There are no advantages for us in giving that up.
Therefore we choose to keep it.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 07 Jan 1999 13:39:39 GMT, povray.org admin team
<new### [at] DESPAMpovrayorg> wrote:
>Compuserve provides us with a comfortable and private environment with which we
>are all comfortable. There are no advantages for us in giving that up.
>Therefore we choose to keep it.
I hate to disagree, because it doesn't really matter to me where the Team
chooses to work so long as you keep giving us great toys, but one advantage
to giving it up would be finding a few more qualified people to help spread
the workload. At present, the only way to be a Team member is to be good,
be dedicated, be invited, ... and be willing to pay for a Compuserve account.
There are lots of people who would probably make great additions to the Team
were it not for the fact that they'll never switch ISPs, and can't justify
the additional expense of a Compuserve account.
There are other comfortable and private environments on the Internet at large,
though they might require some acclimatization: private news servers, private
FTP/web sites, invite-only IRC channels...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>be dedicated, be invited, ... and be willing to pay for a Compuserve account.
Not necessarily. Since we have our own forum, we have a number of discretionary
free accounts. That's not to say that we have any spare, but I wanted to make
the point that we have more support from Compuserve than you seem to think.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
