A generic talk on the OpenMW project.
-
lgromanowski
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1193
- Joined: 05 Aug 2011, 22:21
- Location: Wroclaw, Poland
-
Contact:
Post
by lgromanowski » 21 Aug 2011, 22:30
Zini wrote:
We have quite a few important fixes implemented in 0.12.0 now, plus two new features (MessageBox, Tab Completion).
The rest of 0.12.0 is not going so well. We had a couple of people resigning their tasks (because of difficulty or time constraints) and I haven't heard much from the rest for quite a while.
Is anyone still working on something? If not, any ETA when this is going to change? We still have some important blocking tasks on the 0.12.0 roadmap, which means the 0.12.0 release is still a good while away. But we should at least try to get a bit more substance into 0.12.0. Having two thin releases in a row can't be good for the project's standing.
lgro wrote:
Zini wrote:We have quite a few important fixes implemented in 0.12.0 now, plus two new features (MessageBox, Tab Completion).
The rest of 0.12.0 is not going so well. We had a couple of people resigning their tasks (because of difficulty or time constraints) and I haven't heard much from the rest for quite a while.
Is anyone still working on something? If not, any ETA when this is going to change? We still have some important blocking tasks on the 0.12.0 roadmap, which means the 0.12.0 release is still a good while away. But we should at least try to get a bit more substance into 0.12.0. Having two thin releases in a row can't be good for the project's standing.
#136 - Is in testing phase - I'm trying to build OpenMW on Windows and run it with new configs; and Corristo is testing this on MacOS. I think this should be done at the end of next week (If we don't found any bugs of course).
Zini wrote:
Would have been easier to simply hand of the Windows testing task to our Windows builder. But, okay.
Ace (SWE) wrote:
Which reminds me, my system drive died on me and I still haven't gotten everything compiled up for x64 builds so next release will probably only have a x86 windows build.
Zini wrote:
That is okay. 64 bit doesn't matter yet for OpenMW.
Zini wrote:
Two more:
*
Load REC_PGRD records
Pathgrid records are not loaded yet. We will need them in a few versions for OpenMW and we need them now for the editor. I don't have any documentation about this record's format, unfortunately. Might be a bit tricky.
*
Record Saving
The records we get from the ESM/P files don't require saving in OpenMW. But sometimes we also need to create new records dynamically (e.g. custom classes, alchemy). These must be saved, when writing a saved game.
for now we need these functions in the editor and since editor development will hopefully start soon, we need them urgently. It would be great, if someone could pick it up.
This is an easy task (just do what the load function does in reverse), but will take some endurance. Who ever is taking is task should also do a little test afterwards. Write a minimal program, that reads in an esm file and then writes it to disc again. Afterwards the original file and the new one should be compared. If they are identical the code works.
Any takers?
P.S.: In the current state our reader doesn't read REC_LAND records either. But IIRC the code for these is already in the terrain branch, right?
Edit: Forget the part about checking that the original file and the saved file are identical. We have no means to ensure that the order of the records are matching. It would be still good to have a tool for checking the correctness of the data during a load-save-cycle, but it wouldn't be that easy.
corristo wrote:
I'm planning to consult with folks on Ogre forums about terrain.
Don't know yet while it's not rendering with current code =\
If it won't help I'll try to build debug version of Ogre, and investigate.
best regards,
Lukasz
