Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

#ActualSik_the_hedgehog

Posted 24 July 2013 - 10:02 PM

Not gonna comment on the features since I'm still trying to play catch up (this is what happens when you live in a place where any upgrade to a PC ends up costing an entire salary, let alone getting a new computer that isn't already outdated).

 

I'm curious about the certification part, though. Yeah, sure, having a guarantee that drivers always work the same is nice, but how do they plan to enforce it? Does this mean it'll be outright illegal to release an OpenGL driver that isn't certified? I can see that being a massive issue for FOSS drivers (which does matter on Linux). Does anybody have exact details on what certification allows?

 

EDIT: should have checked more carefully

http://www.khronos.org/conformance/

 

OK, it's mostly a trademark issue (so e.g. Mesa probably still would be safe since it doesn't call itself OpenGL). It seems that FOSS implementations still would be able to go through the implementers program if they want to use the name (not the adopters one due to the fee).


#1Sik_the_hedgehog

Posted 24 July 2013 - 09:57 PM

Not gonna comment on the features since I'm still trying to play catch up (this is what happens when you live in a place where any upgrade to a PC ends up costing an entire salary, let alone getting a new computer that isn't already outdated).

 

I'm curious about the certification part, though. Yeah, sure, having a guarantee that drivers always work the same is nice, but how do they plan to enforce it? Does this mean it'll be outright illegal to release an OpenGL driver that isn't certified? I can see that being a massive issue for FOSS drivers (which does matter on Linux). Does anybody have exact details on what certification allows?


PARTNERS