OpenMW 0.16.0

Anything related to PR, release planning and any other non-technical idea how to move the project forward should be discussed here.
Post Reply
User avatar
pvdk
Posts: 528
Joined: 12 Aug 2011, 16:34

Re: OpenMW 0.16.0

Post by pvdk »

Well that's clearly not what I want. KittyCat helped me out on this, this code is what I meant in the first place:

Code: Select all

dialog.setOptions(options |= QFileDialog::DontUseNativeDialog | QFileDialog::ShowDirsOnly | QFileDialog::ReadOnly);
Thanks for helping me out.
ezzetabi
Posts: 407
Joined: 03 Feb 2012, 16:52

Re: OpenMW 0.16.0

Post by ezzetabi »

Now it seems you want to activate the bits relative to QFileDialog::DontUseNativeDialog, QFileDialog::ShowDirsOnly and QFileDialog::ReadOnly in options.

Sounds more reasonable, yes.
User avatar
Zini
Posts: 5538
Joined: 06 Aug 2011, 15:16

Re: OpenMW 0.16.0

Post by Zini »

Finished my last task for 0.16.0. Does anyone else have anything that he wants to get into master within the next 1-2 days? Something like small bug fixes?

If not, then we should start making another set of RCs.
User avatar
scrawl
Posts: 2152
Joined: 18 Feb 2012, 11:51

Re: OpenMW 0.16.0

Post by scrawl »

Sent you a request for 2 very minor things. pvdk was working on some launcher bugs, I think he's not finished yet.

Other than that, let's go for it. 0.17 will be much more exciting then with physics changes / rotation-scaling / new animation system (as far as i understood) soon ready.
User avatar
psi29a
Posts: 5361
Joined: 29 Sep 2011, 10:13
Location: Belgium
Gitlab profile: https://gitlab.com/psi29a/
Contact:

Re: OpenMW 0.16.0

Post by psi29a »

Will 0.16 have the new ( and awesome) ogre animation code from jhook and kittycat/chris or is that for 0.17?
User avatar
Zini
Posts: 5538
Joined: 06 Aug 2011, 15:16

Re: OpenMW 0.16.0

Post by Zini »

0.17
User avatar
Zini
Posts: 5538
Joined: 06 Aug 2011, 15:16

Re: OpenMW 0.16.0

Post by Zini »

Okay, looks like we are not getting anything else. Build the RCs please. For testing, please focus on the launcher, the character creation/tutorial section and the alchemy window.
User avatar
Ace (SWE)
Posts: 887
Joined: 15 Aug 2011, 14:56

Re: OpenMW 0.16.0

Post by Ace (SWE) »

Wow, you've managed to peg all the three latest releases within one or two days of me leaving my house and development machine. Good thing there's such a thing as remote desktop :)

Windows builds: (Bear in mind that I haven't been able to test them myself, no windows computer available at this time)
Windows 32-bit RC.
Windows 64-bit RC.
User avatar
WeirdSexy
Posts: 611
Joined: 15 Sep 2011, 18:50
Location: USA

Re: OpenMW 0.16.0

Post by WeirdSexy »

Ace (SWE) wrote:Wow, you've managed to peg all the three latest releases within one or two days of me leaving my house and development machine. Good thing there's such a thing as remote desktop :)

Windows builds: (Bear in mind that I haven't been able to test them myself, no windows computer available at this time)
Windows 32-bit RC.
Windows 64-bit RC.
And the RCs are usually released a day or two before I have a huge calculus test or something and I have to try to study and make a video before the release :D I'll be able to get a video made today or tomorrow though!

Some questions I have:
[*]The launcher bugs are all worked out? Doesn't default to OpenGL anymore and doesn't crash when there's a missing config file or wrong Data Files location?
[*]Someone fill be in on x.y syntax. Could you access script local variables this way in vanilla Morrowind or is this something that is OpenMW specific? I never had to write any scripts for any MW modding I ever did so I don't know.
[*]The alchemy window differs from the vanilla one. Someone please inform me as to why it's better than vanilla and why it made sense for us to implement it this way pre 1.0? (I'm assuming this is mainly because we were planning on changing it later anyway, why make it twice? But, any other information is valuable to me.)
[*]Does the spell window differ from vanilla in any significant way? I'm under the impression that it does not, but I haven't looked at it too much.
[*]What was the point of allowing '=' as a synonym for '=='? This doesn't make sense to me, as '=' is generally an assignment operator and '==' is usually for checking equality. But, I don't know our context for using them.

Thanks!
Post Reply