[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#172189: ITP: openscenegraph -- C++/OpenGL based graphics development library.

On Fri, Dec 13, 2002 at 10:36:30PM +0200, Hugo van der Merwe wrote:

 > OK, thanks. Makes more sense. (BTW, I was probably thinking more of
 > the first "parsing" ;) Though I'm not as used to the work
 > "environment" - can one really describe OSG as a "development
 > environment"? That makes me think of e.g. VisualBlabla, or kdevelop.
 > Though, yea, they do talk about "Java Runtime Environments", don't
 > they, but then that is much more than just a library.

 I see what what you mean.  Common usage seems to be:

    Description: Foo (development files)
    Description: Foo (development package)
    Description: Foo (development)
    Description: Foo (development version)

 or the same thing with one of:

    Description: Foo -- development files
    Description: Foo [development files]

 > PFB removed. Sounds like you have OSG experience? I'm only just about
 > to start using the lib. Thought I'll package it first. ;)

 Well, I keep an eye on OSG but I don't use it on a regular basis.

 > I'm wondering about that package now, there is the possibility of
 > including just the source in the -dev package.

 I'd split it off to either the documentation package (if there's one)
 or a package of its own.  If it's a package of its own, I'd provide
 both source and binaries.  Some people might want to just poke arround
 the demos (to see "what OSG is about") and some people might end up
 using the demos as documentation.  I can't remember what the demos
 actually are.  I _do_ remember playing with Performer-town but I don't
 think you can redistribute that (I don't remember the license on the
 Performer demos -- AFAIR it was Free -- but if it's not free, I don't
 think SGI is willing to free the one dataset that puts Performer to
 shame :-)

 > Or is "sgv" a useful enough tool to provide the -demos package? I'm
 > currently suspicious of the -data package, used by the demos, it's
 > possible that at least some of the files in there don't follow DFSG.
 > I'll try finding out...  ;)

 AFAIR sgv is a useful tool on its own.



Reply to: