Re: EXT_framebuffer_object support.
"Corey O'Connor" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lang.haskell.hopengl |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 11:12 AM, Balazs Komuves <[email protected]> wrote: > > I think we should have some testing and code review before trying to merge > it with the > official repository (there is a reason I did not publicised this before, > though the FBO stuff > is fairly new). For example I just discovered two (very minor) bugs by > trying to generate > Haddock documentation. The API isn't set into stone either; I hope it's > reasonable > enough, but some changes may be beneficial. Hm. I certainly agree that testing and API review is required for release. However I'd prefer other developers to have easy access to these patches through a main development repository than not. If API stability is a concern with the main repository then I suggest having two repositories: One for development and another for stable use. Cheers, Corey > On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 6:58 PM, Corey O'Connor <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> Excellent stuff! I like having the framebuffer texture functions check >> the status as well. That's a handy addition. >> So how do we get your patch into the mainline repo? I'd hate to have >> another person duplicate the same work again. >> >> Cheers, >> Corey O'Connor >> >> > >