openmw.org

Specifically regarding the example, though, it's an example of a mod that requires you have one of a few different other mods installed, but doesn't mind which. This wouldn't work amazingly in a system where the body replacer mods can declare their existence via a content file. We can't just allow m...

For a recent personal anecdote, I've got a New Vegas playthrough going now with the mod New Vegas Redesigned - it's a mod that redesigns the appearances of the characters of the game, and which in order to do so properly needs you to have a particular set of body meshes installed for the characters...

The console command is showscenegraph

Could you give me an example where not having the ability to sort the load order of asset directories independently from content files has caused you problems? Depending on how annoying something needs to be before it's a problem, simply having more content files to organise than is strictly necess...

There's no geometry being drawn with that shader. Usually, post-processing is done by drawing a screen-sized square with the post-processing shader with the previous render target available as a texture.

Anything with a more permissive licence can be sublicensed as GPL3 when it's added to our repo. Anything with a less permissive licence isn't allowed in our repo in the first place.

Images can be covered by the GPL, but it's not necessarily the best licence to put those things under.

The specular function is just boring old Phong reflection, which has been standard since the 70s and is so ubiquitous that it's part of OpenGL's fixed-function pipeline. It's only not used in really recent games which use something based on real life, like Cook-Torrance instead, so there's no reason...

Can't do that, because after the merge B isn't B anymore. It is a new content file (B'). To do it in order, you would have to port C2 to B' first. There are no benefits to this approach, especially since you lose the ability to aromatically detect conflicts. Surely the conflicts still exist between...

Is it not conceptually simpler to merge C1 into B and then merge C2 into the new B as a completely independent operation? If we compare to Git, we've got the equivalent of trying to merge two branches into master at once, when really we should merge one branch, then resolve any conflicts this causes...