With all of this engine talk going on, I'd like to interject with a very important bit of advice.
Make games. Don't make engines.Now obviously I don't mean to just
throw down the amount of work you guys have done here, but let's be honest,
with the multitude of awesome frameworks and engines available, there's simply no reason to add another log in the fire when you already have plenty of options.
You could think, yeah, I'm making this engine for my future games, but that's actually quite difficult to do well without editing the engine to fit your game every time. Unless you're actually creating a game, you won't know how your future games will be structured, and the best structure (e.g. inheritance as opposed to using a component system) can change from game to game.
Another point is that engines don't impress anyone, except for maybe other gamedevs. Yeah, you could have a couple of squares bounce on the screen or some characters walk across the screen, but when you're trying to show off something that can't quite be seen, nor is a tangible, playable game, there's no point.
On the flipside, the way engines
do come to light, is that they came from a game. A common misconception is that one would make the engine, then the game, when in reality, most engines come from having a game already made, just without the extra stuff. This is how people generally create their own toolkits, which is basically a level higher up from the engine: the code you always write when you start creating the game and simply don't feel like typing over and over.
In any case, this blog post can explain it better than I can:
http://scientificninja.com/blog/write-games-not-enginesBut again,
don't make engines, make games.