Or OpenGL 3.0, as the ARB calls it, was released today with little in the way of anything new. The regulars at the opengl forums don’t seem to happy about the total lack of innovation after being promised a new API that would be smaller and cleaner with legacy code supported through a emulation layer. I’ve been looking forward to this for over a year and I have to say I’m a little disappointed.
at least they released something even if it looks rather like a maintenance update than a *.0 release (beside the fact that they are one year to late).
AFAIK 3.1 was intended to be the cleanup release with new object model etc. so it seems they are still following the roadmap (?).
Ah well, it’s still going to be 5 years before we can rely on it being everywhere anyway though.
Cas 
It is better than nothing, I’m very happy.
Ok, found a good explanation/clarification of someone of the ARB/NVIDIA why it happened this way
(sorry no direct link, search for ‘barthold’)
Oh how I wish D3D could become supported on other platforms, since OGL now officially seems to be the inferior and stagnating API.
OpenGL is not stagnating and it now integrates the latest features even though the major revamp of this API has not been done. Linux doesn’t need D3D, we have OpenGL.
Maybe Linux doesn’t need it per se, but it would certainly improve with it. Maybe D3D on Linux is bit of a silly thought, but what if D3D was an Open Standard with Open Source implementations, would you still feel that way?
D3D isn’t perfect but there’s no denying that OpenGL gradually fell behind D3D, especially after the ARB basically made a fool of themselves with OpenGL 3.0. That’s stagnation to me.