If you go to http://sourceforge.net/projects/mesa3d, it states that Mesa is under the MIT license. Quite compatible, no? ;) e David Sowsy wrote: > > > Personally, I agree with David - I think it'd be a good idea to port Mesa > > (assuming license compatibility) and technical feasibility, but that we > > should also have an API that wraps OpenGL so that people can optionally use > > a more familiar (Be-like) API. > > Mesa is GPL'ed. It doesn't have to be part of our project, but that's not > to say that someone couldn't build it when we are done. The last verson > I successfully got built I believe was a 3.2 beta on Intel in R4, a couple > years ago and I recall tossing emails back and forth with Duncan Wilcox on > that. > > > David has made mention of 3DKit, which we can > > perhaps rebuild into its former glory, albeit as a part of the game kit > > overall, or we can strike out into new territory. > Whoa, whoa...It really never made it to a 'stage of glory'. > It was just an idea. > > > If, by the time the R5 classes are done, no one has looked at OpenGL then > > I'll give it a shot myself. <famous last words>After all, how hard could it > > be to port Mesa?</famous last words> > > > > :) > > > > Rob > > > > > >