The working group is busy with the next spec revision
Yay! An informal status update!
Still, during the course of a year of OpenGL3.0-Longs Peak Edition, there managed to be 4 newsletters cranked out. Sure, a newsletter might take up someone’s valuable time but the information contained within (ok, it’s really a PR thing) is gold.
In this day and age of parallel processing I can’t see why someone can’t spin off a group to do it. How about the group that decided to continue to call what could have been 2.2, 3.0? Actually, scratch that… They maintained code-compatibility but broke hardware compatibility so bumping the major version number at least clarifies the situation a bit.
Speaking of parallel efforts (and harping on recent history), the ARB should have had the foresight to develop that version 2.2 (deprecations!) along side a forward looking API (LP). I would have whole-heartedly supported that. Just because LP was voted down last Oct-Dec-Jan doesn’t mean that the effort couldn’t continue to resolve issues for a re-assessment in the future. Now, I assume, a major API rework would have to start again from scratch.
Anyway, back on topic, the newsletter doesn’t have to be about upcoming unannounced API changes (or backpedaling). It can be about current 2.1 issues or neato things about 3.0 we’d be interested in. Hell, it could even publish community articles, or better, professional articles in the tone of whitepaper overviews (render/optimization/GP techniques).
I won’t bother to ask about the progress of the next spec revision, but how about progress on the newsletter? Is anyone actively working on that?