Was just about to update to 2.0 (figured that enough time had passed), however when I went to the google code page I was greeted with this:
News: April 27, 2008:
This is now the official code depo for jMonkeyEngine 2.0!
Please note, the source code herein is not considered final and the API may change without notice. If you use it before we have released a true "release candidate" or similar, you do so at your own risk.
Basically I'm wondering if its safe to go ahead and update at this point? This is for a 'professional' project and I do not want to increase ANY risks in it (it's already risky enough). Also, any idea when a 2.0 RC will be available?
Like was said before in many places, due to jME2 simply being more popular it gets more fixes and more improvements than version 1.0. In addition to that many changes such as the switch to enums and removal of TriangleBatches also increase usability of the engine.
I did read your post. Is there a particular concern you have?
That news post on the repository is quite old and does not refer to the new state of how jME updates work. It is much better to update your jME as those updates may have potential bug fixes. Also it is hard to say if it's appropriate to be used for a professional project, as it depends on its magnitude, but I can confidently say jME2 is more appropriate than jME1. As for when 2.0 RC will be available, I don't think it will ever be, unless some organized effort brings it. For now I suggest we wait for Ardor3D instead (renanse's new game engine).
... I don't think it will ever be, unless some organized effort brings it. For now I suggest we wait for Ardor3D instead (renanse's new game engine).
You are now hinting, what I already felt... the time I read that the last active developer has quit on JMonkeyEngine I was almost certain that JMonkeyEngine is officially "dead" now.
I know that sounds harsh and I apologize for that, but let's be realistic: who of us has the *knowledge* and time to develop the engine to AAA (although JMonkey would have the power).
It's also not the first time I've seen that; e.g. Ca3D engine has been released for some timne now but contains still some major bugs:
- linux port still incomplete, dynamic shadows not always correct, sound issues
Some lines below the developer claims:
"I rely on the Linux users skills and experience to transfer the provided information to their favourite OS."
Needless to say, no one ever did the remaining work...
Just because I didn't comment in the other thread about the "death of jME", I'll throw my two cents in here: if you want to wait for Ardor3D, go ahead. Personally, I've been there, done that (waiting for a mature, stable, engine that does everything I think I want). More than 10 years later, and many abortive starts later, in multiple languages, that perfect engine hasn't come along, and I haven't gotten very far on the project I want to build. When I found jME, I liked what I saw and decided to jump in with both feet. I've seen at least one "real" project (Bang! Howdy) released using this engine, so I know it's more mature than any of the many "uber" engines that are "in development". Just a few months later, my project is further than it's ever been. There's much about jME (and 3D engines in general) that I don't understand, but so far I haven't hit any show-stoppers in jME that prevent me from doing what I want. If that day ever comes, then I'll either figure out the existing source enough to fix it, or I'll look at the feasibility of porting to another engine. Maybe Ardor3D will be released by then. ;) In any case, I'm not concerned about the status of jME, whether it's "dead" or not; if no updates to the existing source are made by an official developer, if no 2.0 or even RC releases are ever done, I'm still more than happy with what it is today. As an extra bonus, I was thinking that night that I'm actually having "fun" coding in Java again.
@mjsimpson Thanks for saying that, it gives me confidence to keep working with jME. Also, just out of curiousity, what is your project that you are working on about?
