OpenMW 0.43.0
- Capostrophic
- Posts: 794
- Joined: 22 Feb 2016, 20:32
Re: OpenMW 0.43.0
Reverse pickpocketing as implemented by Kortunov is an optional feature (advanced pickpocketing; also changes the formula for pickpocketing - to the weight of an item of the cost) to be enabled in settings.cfg. Why should it even be a fallback setting?
Re: OpenMW 0.43.0
It's Friday! Should I apply the release tag?
- AnyOldName3
- Posts: 2686
- Joined: 26 Nov 2015, 03:25
Re: OpenMW 0.43.0
I don't have anything in the works that'll be finished soon. There are a couple of PRs ready to merge, though, and as one of them's a bug fix, I'd at least wait for that. There's also at least one change I'd like to see make its way into Ace's provided OSG builds (and therefore the official Windows) builds in this release, and they're out of date. If that happens after the tag is made, the prebuild script may not update stuff if people want to build their own 0.43 with the same features.
Re: OpenMW 0.43.0
Will hold off then. Thank you!
Re: OpenMW 0.43.0
@Capostrophic: A fallback setting would (maybe) have allowed for automatically re-using the setting for reverse pickpocketing in post-1.0 OpenMW. Anyway, I would have to take a closer look at that PR again (weirdly titled) and we would definitely also get scrawl's input on that, but I am still not inclined to merge it. After 1.0 the weight/cost change would have to be thrown out anyway. Seems a bit like a waste of time.
@raevol: I think you are confusing something here. The tag is placed when we are ready to release. We don't even are in RC phase yet.
@AnyOldName3: There are always more PRs to merge and bugs to fix. I don't see that as a reason to delay a release. Unless there is something of particular importance that needs to get merged?
@raevol: I think you are confusing something here. The tag is placed when we are ready to release. We don't even are in RC phase yet.
@AnyOldName3: There are always more PRs to merge and bugs to fix. I don't see that as a reason to delay a release. Unless there is something of particular importance that needs to get merged?
Re: OpenMW 0.43.0
Worth noting that I'm not automatically building OSG packages, they take more fiddling to build cleanly so I only do those "manually" instead of with fully automated scripts.
Started up a packaging of the latest OSG from scrawls master though, so I should have something uploaded today.
Edit:
As it turns out, the new OSG has updated dependency requirements for VS2015+, so I probably won't be able to get new packages done for that today.
Started up a packaging of the latest OSG from scrawls master though, so I should have something uploaded today.
Edit:
As it turns out, the new OSG has updated dependency requirements for VS2015+, so I probably won't be able to get new packages done for that today.
Re: OpenMW 0.43.0
Sorry, I think I am confused. Do packagers build from the 0.43 branch then? Without a tag? Sorry I am still pretty lost when it comes to Github, since I only use it when we do releases.
Re: OpenMW 0.43.0
Quick summary:
- The release branch is created and the change log is updated (Zini)
- RC packages are created from the head of the release branch (packagers)
- Testing and repeating the step above as necessary
- The release tag is applied (raevol)
- The release packages are build from the tag (packagers)
- The release branch is created and the change log is updated (Zini)
- RC packages are created from the head of the release branch (packagers)
- Testing and repeating the step above as necessary
- The release tag is applied (raevol)
- The release packages are build from the tag (packagers)
Re: OpenMW 0.43.0
Alright, got it. Thank you!!
Re: OpenMW 0.43.0
@Ace: What is your status? Should we go ahead? Or wait a couple more days?