openmw.org

Work on 0.38.0 is already well under way. Time for a new roadmap posting.

Not much to say about OpenMW. We are more or less done. Still a few minor holes to plug, some fixes and scrawl also seems to be doing some more optimisation.

The big topic is OpenMW-CS. Unfortunately development has calmed down a lot. We need more activity, if we want to finish our Editor in time for the OpenMW 1.0 release (not mandatory, but strongly preferable). Consider this a call to arms.

The two biggest issues (workload-wise) are:
* Editor: Reimplement 3D scene camera system
* Editor: redo user settings system

These tasks aren't incredibly hard, but not trivial either. The former one is especially important, because we can't do much about the missing 3D editing functions until the cameras have been sorted out.

For the 3D scene, we are still missing the rendering for a few components:
* Editor: Render cell markers v2
* Editor: Render water
* Editor: Render cell border markers
* Editor: Render path grid v2

Not essential to progress but it would be nice if we could complete scene rendering for 0.38.0.

Of course there are still dozens of other (mostly smaller) editor tasks; too many to sum them up here.


For the release schedule we want something faster again. 1-2 months. Getting into the one release per month schedule would be nice, but that would require a lot of new development activity on the editor. As it stands we don't have enough tasks left for OpenMW to make it worth a (non-maintenance) release, so future releases will have to be primarily about OpenMW-CS.

What's the release schedule for re-implementing shadows? A better way of phrasing that, is what priority would you put on that feature?

I'd really like to show my friends an OpenMW video compared to a Morrowind MGE XE video, and say not only does it play better, but it looks better too.

Zini wrote:The big topic is OpenMW-CS. Getting into the one release per month schedule would be nice, but that would require a lot of new development activity on the editor. As it stands we don't have enough tasks left for OpenMW to make it worth a (non-maintenance) release, so future releases will have to be primarily about OpenMW-CS.

Yes, please!!!

I've not been following this project for that long, so this may seem like a dumb question, but the 'Current status' section of the GitHub page links to the issue tracker goals for 1.0, implying that these are the only things that need to be done before 1.0, but there are separate bug fixes and features listed for 0.38, which I'd imagine also need to be resolved pre-1.0. This is just a case of slightly unclear wording, right?

AnyOldName3 wrote:I've not been following this project for that long, so this may seem like a dumb question, but the 'Current status' section of the GitHub page links to the issue tracker goals for 1.0, implying that these are the only things that need to be done before 1.0, but there are separate bug fixes and features listed for 0.38, which I'd imagine also need to be resolved pre-1.0. This is just a case of slightly unclear wording, right?

IIRC the reason for that is that some 1.0 features are things that are currently known but not currently priorities. Things like 0.38 are things that are known and priorities, or that become known as work on a priority feature for 0.38 requires them.

The distinction between issues on the current milestone and 1.0 is a bit arbitrary. We will most likely switch to a different model post 1.0 (IIRC scrawl proposed something a while back that should work).

But yeah, ideally with the current system in 0.38.0 we have issues that are high priority and in 1.0 we have issues that are either lower priority or that we are just not ready for.

I decided to take on the user settings issue. Not just fixes, but a clean rewrite. After looking at the situation some more I found other problems and just patching it up won't do it.

That leaves us with five more tasks on the list. Any takers? Come and get them while they are still hot.

I decided to take on the user settings issue. Not just fixes, but a clean rewrite. After looking at the situation some more I found other problems and just patching it up won't do it.

In case you didn't already know, the current user settings system does not fill in default settings until the settings window is opened.

The distinction between issues on the current milestone and 1.0 is a bit arbitrary. We will most likely switch to a different model post 1.0 (IIRC scrawl proposed something a while back that should work).

We never formally decided what the current roadmap means, but for me it is:

1.0: issues that need fixing before the 1.0 release
0.38 / next minor version: confirmed issues of undecided priority that are OK to start working on. Not necessarily a requirement for 1.0 release.

To be honest, assigning an issue to 0.38 is a bit meaningless, since we already have fields for "Priority", "Confirmed/Unconfirmed" and can set to "openmw-future" for issues we are not yet ready for. Maybe a better way of doing it would be only assigning an issue to 0.x once a contributor starts working on the issue.

In case you didn't already know, the current user settings system does not fill in default settings until the settings window is opened.

I wasn't aware of that. One more reason for a complete rewrite. Thanks.


Regarding the roadmap: More or less. But I don't think it is a good idea to change things around now. The current system will serve us acceptably well until we reach 1.0.

After 1.0 we will keep the future milestone as a general repository for usable issues. I am considering an intermediate milestone "next" like we used before we moved to the current tracker. Alternatively we could put the priority field to use. But then we should agree upon what the priorities actually mean. Currently its kinda arbitrary.

Will object drag to scene and object move around scene be in 0.38? Will they be implemented as the last features? I could actually handle the current camera, I have my land generated and I'm very anxious to start placing statics.