Open GoogleCodeExporter opened 8 years ago
Hello, amerkoleci
Thanks for your concern.
MonoXNA currently does not support XNA 4.0, due to lack of developers. We don't
have focus to support IPhone or other devices. Like you said, there are other
projects.
Original comment by gse...@gmail.com
on 18 Jul 2010 at 4:23
We will definitely add 4.0 support in the future, and hopefully we'll have the
time to look into new platforms as well, but at the present time we have more
than enough to do with getting XNA 3.1 support up to par. We have plans to do a
3.1 release some time after the mono 2.8 release.
We could branch to 4.0 now, but as gsedej pointed out we wouldn't have the time
to work on it yet.
Original comment by lav...@gmail.com
on 21 Jul 2010 at 5:40
Would be possible for me to take part of Mono.XNA and have access to SVN?
Maybe i can start fully work on.
Original comment by amerkol...@gmail.com
on 22 Jul 2010 at 7:12
We can give you SVN write access, but you have to submit a few patches first. I
hope this is understandable.
Contact me on mail or irc if you would like some help getting started.
Original comment by lav...@gmail.com
on 22 Jul 2010 at 9:46
I can't find you mail, whats the name to connect to irc channel otherwise?
Original comment by amerkol...@gmail.com
on 26 Jul 2010 at 6:31
email: lavima@gmail.com
irc: #monoxna @ gimp.net
Original comment by lav...@gmail.com
on 26 Jul 2010 at 7:24
just wondering how much of XNA 3.1 is done for now?
thanks for the good work guys !
Original comment by inno.cl...@gmail.com
on 27 Sep 2010 at 2:04
The runtime framework can handle a decent subset of the 2d functionality in
XNA. The content pipeline and 3d support is still in development though.
I'm currently working on the content pipeline implementation of XmlImporter and
TextureImporter and the default texture processor.
Original comment by lav...@gmail.com
on 27 Sep 2010 at 2:23
I've been playing around with XNA 4.0 lately, and it strikes me that the 4.0
version migh be more suitable for cross-platform development. It would
certainly lessen the pain of implementing some of the features.
It might actually be a good idea to leave 3.1 behind and focus on 4.0.
Original comment by lav...@gmail.com
on 12 Jan 2011 at 7:48
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
amerkol...@gmail.com
on 14 Jul 2010 at 2:57