Originally posted by starshipeleven
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
RADV Is Now Considered A Vulkan Conformant Driver
Collapse
X
-
- Likes 2
-
Originally posted by duby229 View PostYeah, I get it, they have to leave it up to lawyers to get it to a position where programmers can release code. I'm fully aware. But that process has been anything else but transparent. There is literally zero information about it. None at all. No evidence what-so-ever.
This is not about "releasing it", it's about "significantly rewriting it so that it can be released". I have explained this multiple times.Test signature
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by bridgman View Post
Do you have me on "ignore" ? I wouldn't blame you but it might explain why you think there has been no communication
This is not about "releasing it", it's about "significantly rewriting it so that it can be released". I have explained this multiple times.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by bridgman View Post
Do you have me on "ignore" ? I wouldn't blame you but it might explain why you think there has been no communication
This is not about "releasing it", it's about "significantly rewriting it so that it can be released". I have explained this multiple times.
Dave.
- Likes 3
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Qaridariumand if you start to be sane then end this to: "keep three different APIs working" ... we only need ONE (1.) API and this api is called Vulkan.
just stop DirectX... and stop Apple-Metal...Test signature
- Likes 1
Comment
-
bridgman
If a re-write of the Vulkan API was deemed necessary (rather than just simply opening as much of the existing closed code as you can), how come you didn't have your team contribute your existing work with Arlie? Or, since AMD worked on the API before Arlie, how come you didn't contact him to help contribute toward your work? After all, kind of the sole purpose of open-sourcing something is to allow multiple developers work independently on the same project. Sorry if you already answered this somewhere, but I hadn't seen the reason for this. No judgment from me, just curious.
Comment
-
Originally posted by bridgman View Post
Yes
In our defence, you "only" had to make one API work while we had to keep three different APIs working during the rewrite.
Your definition of "sane" may be different from mine. I don't see "going out of business" as an outcome which would suggest sanity on the part of the decision maker.Last edited by smitty3268; 06 October 2017, 01:45 PM.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by schmidtbag View PostIf a re-write of the Vulkan API was deemed necessary (rather than just simply opening as much of the existing closed code as you can), how come you didn't have your team contribute your existing work with Arlie? Or, since AMD worked on the API before Arlie, how come you didn't contact him to help contribute toward your work? .
Originally posted by schmidtbag View PostAfter all, kind of the sole purpose of open-sourcing something is to allow multiple developers work independently on the same project. Sorry if you already answered this somewhere, but I hadn't seen the reason for this. No judgment from me, just curious.
Originally posted by smitty3268 View PostWell, you've currently got a radv vulkan driver for free so I have a hard time seeing it causing you to go out of business. I mean, if 1 part time project by Dave on the side is more work than the entire company of AMD can afford for their entire GPU division....
Q was saying that we should stop support for DirectX and MacOS, which would be a quick way to reach that "out of business" end state.Last edited by bridgman; 06 October 2017, 03:05 PM.Test signature
- Likes 1
Comment
Comment