openmw.org

jirka642 wrote:Slowly working on it: http://imgur.com/a/TUXDA (static text test)
Still needs some fixes for when the tooltip is near the edges of OpenMW window, and then I can go work on saving/loading and openmw-cs stuff.
Its also possible to use #{tag} in text to retrieve some variables (gmst, settings, ...). Not sure if that would be useful for modding...

That's looking mighty fine already jirka, you have no idea how happy I am to see this take form already
So the amount of text defines the height of the window and the width is static I assume?
And the text is entered in the item property window of OpenCS?

Happy to see this too, because I plan to make some good use of it.

Ragox wrote:So the amount of text defines the height of the window and the width is static I assume?

Yes, the width is hardcoded right now, but it would be easy to make it into settings option.

Ragox wrote:And the text is entered in the item property window of OpenCS?

That's how I plan to do it, but I need to complete other parts first...

Berandas wrote:Pěkná práce, jen tak dál.

psi29a wrote:If you have that much to 'spend', why on this issue and not say on dynamic shadows and other graphical improvements? (Just curious to your motivation.)

If the progress in this thread is any indication, I could've put down a hundred bucks for that months ago! (still would...)

Perhaps we should really look into bounties.

https://www.bountysource.com/

I also had this idea, it would be nice feature, especially for new players.
Oh man, I wish I new how to code.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3513&p=39168#p39168

Bang!
Just need to test it for bugs and then I will do pull request to have it merged into main OpenMW repo.
- Should support all item types
- Is displayed only in Inventory mode (right click, merchants, etc..)
- width and display delay can be changed by new values in settings-default.cfg

And if you can't wait for it to be merged, you could compile it from here and test it out yourself.

psi29a wrote:Perhaps we should really look into bounties.

Is there any specific reason why that could be a bad idea? I think that it could make more people that didn't have enough motivation or were just too lazy contribute.

The main issues are related to the possibility that two people could both work on the same feature, and then it's difficult to judge who's most deserving of the bounty, especially if one person's work is derived from the others', or if one person comes up with a better implementation, but takes a lot longer to do it, by which time the bounty's already been awarded to someone else.

Normally if there is a bounty, you communicate in the bounty thread. So yeah, who ever is first AND fulfills the requirements of the bounty wins the pot. So it is good to check to see if anyone is working on the bounty.

How are claims processed?

When a bounty claim is submitted by a developer, the claim is put into a two week verification period. Backers are notified by email and can then accept or reject the claim.

If all Backers vote to accept the claim, it is processed immediately and the developer is awarded the bounty.
If any Backer fails to accept the claim, it remains in the two week waiting period.
If any Backer has an issue with the claim, they can reject it. Claims cannot be paid out until the dispute is resolved and the rejected status is lifted.

Pull request: https://github.com/OpenMW/openmw/pull/1075

Also, it looks like I found a bug in OpenMW-CS while testing: https://bugs.openmw.org/issues/3561

@AnyOldName3 @psi29a
Looks like that could possibly lead to some ugly fights over who should have gotten the bounty. I guess you can't have everything you want...