Re: [AD] Possible new features for Allegro?

[Hein Zelle <hein@xxxxxxxxxx>]

re: (whole thread)

Good grief indeed, George.

I still don't understand why everybody dislikes separate packages so
much. (Well, I can guess, but I'll come to that in a minute). I truly
prefer allegro being simple and non-bloated. Most games use only half
of what allegro can do, and even though it's a library I think we
should realize that in many cases it will be preferable to only include
what you use and no more.

Which brings us back to another old issue which is what I think this
is really about: modularity. If (I'm not certain if we should) we can
split up allegro and make it more modular, many of these problems
could be solved. It would require 2 basic things:

- a way to 'hook' new functionality into allegro. this applies to
  things like bitmap loaders and graphics modes such as what allegrogl
  does. Possibly also applies to libnet if it were integrated: plug in
  your network-driver.

- but most important: an _____EASY______ way to obtain all these
  addons. This is where I think all the complaints come from: every
  addon requires a search, a separate install, and many are not of the
  same mature quality that allegro can boast.

I believe the latter part would solve lots. If we could devise a
system of add-ons (preferably with an official add-on for each piece
of functionality) with an download system (website, whatever) that
enables you to pick and download all your add-ons, we'd be a lot
further. No more searching: everything is in 1 place with one official
addon for each problem. One make system: simply install the package in
the source tree and run make, or unzip it for binaries like djgpp
does.

This gives some extra options that have been asked for often:
- ability to leave out parts of allegro. Don't want 3d routines? don't
  install them then.
- anything between small and huge downloads
- (possibly:) smaller executables / library
- infinite extensibility. new graphics loader? just add it.
  Different 3d routines? replace the old ones.
- 'degradable' packages. Anything that isn't maintained for long will
  remain until nobody uses anymore, then disappear by itsself. 

The last point is also one of the greatest drawbacks I guess: for this
system to work you'll need 'official' and 'maintained' packages, at
least for the most important packages. That will mean more work for
the allegro developers who may not want this. On the other hand, the
set of 'official mature allegro packages' can be kept as small as we
want and does not _need_ to be greater than it is currently.

I'll go on dreaming now, wonder what is thought of this :-)
     Hein Zelle

>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-<
 Hein Zelle                     hein@xxxxxxxxxx
	                        http://www.icce.rug.nl/~hein
>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-<