Q about JOGL and LWJGL

I'm really just curious but why the interest in JOGL when LWJGL appears to already work quite well? I found this thread: http://www.jmonkeyengine.com/jmeforum/index.php?topic=45.0 posted some time back and I'm wondering what has changed so much since then? 

Have changes and development to JOGL made it the "better" choice now? :?

jME will continue to be developed with LWJGL. However, jME has a pretty flexible architecture, and if users want to make a JOGL port, they can. As to why they want to do that, let's hope they'll see this thread…

( "some time back" = 2003?!! that topic number is 45 )


One is almost complete.

Yeah, the was a while ago.  :wink:

I've read through the more recent thread that Badmi points out and it sounds very promising… My hats off to Patrick, Badmi and all the intrepid coders working on it!  8)

But… I'm still not grokking what makes JOGL attactive enough for someone to want to do jME bindings. JOGL is heavier binding than LWJGL as I understand it. Is it more flexible? Better constructed?  :?