On Wed, 26 Jan 2000, JONATHAN DINERSTEIN wrote:
> I think that open source OpenGL will eventually replace Mesa for the simple
> fact that vendors will trust SGI's OpenGL over Mesa. I'm not saying that Mesa
> is a poor library, but that SGI's OpenGL has the SGI name attached.
>
> For the best benefit for everybody, I think moving Mesa development to OpenGL
> is a good idea. I think we've all seen a lot of time/work/effort wasted by
> open source developers who can't all stand behind one effort.
I don't like this clause in the FAQ though:
Ownership of the original code will remain in SGI. Contributors of
modifications to the original code will own their own modifications
(independent of the original code); however, SGI will ask for
assignment back to SGI of any contributors' modifications offered to
SGI as gatekeeper of the "official" Original Code of the SI. This is
to ensure that the OpenGL SI can continue to play the role of "the gold
standard", freely shared with the development community.
I don't like the idea of giving Mesa away for SGI to act as gatekeeper.
Since SGI are an IHV - and they are snuggling up with nVidia, there would
be a conflict of interests that might make the resulting Mesa/SGI hybrid
unacceptable to (say) 3Dfx or Matrox. I don't think this is a problem
immediately - but who knows how the politics could change in a year or
two.
I think we have to think more in terms of pulling stuff out of SI and
into Mesa - if the license can be straightened out in *that* direction.
Steve Baker (817)619-2657 (Vox/Vox-Mail)
Raytheon Systems Inc. (817)619-2466 (Fax)
Work: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.hti.com
Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://web2.airmail.net/sjbaker1
_______________________________________________
Mesa-dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.mesa3d.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
