Developers using Windows as development environment, hence able to manually test patches that are likely to behave strangely on that platform.
Contributors outside of the team are welcome.
Developers using Windows as development environment, hence able to manually test patches that are likely to behave strangely on that platform.
Contributors outside of the team are welcome.
@shh thank you for the patch! Sorry for long reviewing.
The patch seems ok to me. I'm going to commit that if nobody has objections.
I pinged them on twitter. We'll see.
Successful build - Chance fights ever on the side of the prudent.
Upload patch again with new master revision and full file context.
In D1784#75877, @vladislavbelov wrote:In D1784#75860, @Stan wrote:For Windows we officially dropped it when we committed #5098. For the rest of the platforms most of the ticket are about being compatible, but there is no clear decision.
What's about 2.9?
Wrong ticket #2891
In D1784#75860, @Stan wrote:For Windows we officially dropped it when we committed #5098. For the rest of the platforms most of the ticket are about being compatible, but there is no clear decision.
What's about 2.9?
In D1784#75840, @vladislavbelov wrote:In D1784#75828, @Itms wrote:I think that if we keep supporting 2.8 we need to build patches with it, else we will commit a lot of 3.0+ changes without noticing. I believe the overwhelming majority of distributions used by our devs and contributors ships 3+.
I would be in favor of officially moving to 3+, which is possible if it is available (not necessarily the default,since it is for devs and package maintainers) on the platforms you mention.I definitely agree to move forward and drop old versions. But probably we still have users with OS that uses 2.8 (and sometimes can't use newer versions without pain) by default or we recommend to use 2.8 by our build instructions.
So at least we need to make a remark about it in our build instructions.
In D1784#75828, @Itms wrote:I think that if we keep supporting 2.8 we need to build patches with it, else we will commit a lot of 3.0+ changes without noticing. I believe the overwhelming majority of distributions used by our devs and contributors ships 3+.
I would be in favor of officially moving to 3+, which is possible if it is available (not necessarily the default,since it is for devs and package maintainers) on the platforms you mention.
I definitely agree to move forward and drop old versions. But probably we still have users with OS that uses 2.8 (and sometimes can't use newer versions without pain) by default or we recommend to use 2.8 by our build instructions.
I think that if we keep supporting 2.8 we need to build patches with it, else we will commit a lot of 3.0+ changes without noticing. I believe the overwhelming majority of distributions used by our devs and contributors ships 3+.
I can confirm this is fixing assertion error in both cases described in ticket.
Works for me, thanks for this patch!
You could use "Update Diff" in right panel or update via arch.
Oops, I've forgot to fix the copyright year. Should I fix and add new diff?
Successful build - Chance fights ever on the side of the prudent.
Successful build - Chance fights ever on the side of the prudent.
Done as advised by Stan.
Thank you for your first contribution. Looks simple enough. I added respective guys that are knowledgeable in this area, of course, they can resign from this revision proposal. Please also keep in mind the advice that Stan gave you. Update dates please in those files.
The patch looks good to me. I'm no programmer though so I can't give you a definitive review. I guess it's no question to add an actual editor for particles so patch is complete. Only missing to update the file license headers date.
Okay, you're right. Go ahead and thanks for the patch!
@Itms can I commit this separately after fixing the headers ? The other diff is gonna be quite big.
The patch looks good and it works for me too! However, I tested building Atlas and got the following warnings:
Atlas loads, generates, saves maps -> ok
no error or crash in game starting different maps
So far I can tell that warnings are solved. I did not try to run game with this patch yet.