Re: [tsc-devel] Re: SFML Port New Strategy...

Quintus | Tue, 24 Nov 2015 09:28:33 UTC

datahead <…r@f…> writes:

> If you wish to abandon my suggestion to start over because I have not
> been available much the last couple weeks, this is your right.

If I am the only one who is going to work on the SFML port, I will do it
the way I think it is useful. Everyone — not just you — is invited to
join my work on it to speed things up, but if nobody does, it is obvious
that the resulting code will reflect the architecture that I am thinking
is best. If on the other hand somebody is willing to help, I will of
course adapt my way of coding in such a way that no duplicate efforts
are made.

> Regardless of who codes it, I still think it would be best to
> restrategize as I outlined above and separate the architecture changes
> from the the SFML porting.

I have come to the conclusion that you are probably correct with
this. The cVideo class however does several unportable things (just take
a look at one of my earlier replies to this thread) that are going to
complicate this. Probably I just have to try it out.

> I could resume looking at SFML tutorials and the existing OpenGL code,
> but it could be some weeks before I have a suggestion.  As I've always
> said, I cannot make promises on deliverables or end dates if tasks are
> completed (no promises at all).

We’re an open-source project on free time, so this is absolutely fine.

> If you must just make a decision now, this is fine.

If I want to start coding, I have to make a decision. That’s pretty
unavoidable :-)

Vale,
Quintus

-- 
#!/sbin/quintus
Blog: http://www.guelkerdev.de

GnuPG key: F1D8799FBCC8BC4F