Re: [Flightgear-devel] Terrain Haze v1.3

2012-04-26 Thread Frederic Bouvier
> Thorsten, > > > > One comment - to avoid any problems with merge requests being > > > lost/ignored - who is this 'aimed' at? I.e who needs to review it > > > and decide? I don't feel qualified, for example :) > > > > > > (But maybe I just merge it and see who complains ;) > > > > > > Not that

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Terrain Haze v1.3

2012-04-26 Thread Renk Thorsten
> The direct link to the merge request is usually handy. Will do next time. > Effects/terrain-default.eff has two techniques number 4. They seem > similar > > Could you check ? Aarg... GIT strikes again. The two blocks with technique 4 are identical copies - one of them can go. Must be my scr

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Random Buildings

2012-04-26 Thread Mathias Fröhlich
Hi, On Thursday, April 26, 2012 08:32:19 James Turner wrote: > On 25 Apr 2012, at 14:56, Stuart Buchanan wrote: > > If you're going to be looking in the code anyway, the depth of the > > quad tree is set in some constants at the top of the SGBuildingBin.cxx > > file, and (IIRC) the LoD range is a

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Terrain Haze v1.3

2012-04-26 Thread Frederic Bouvier
Thorsten, > > One comment - to avoid any problems with merge requests being > > lost/ignored - who is this 'aimed' at? I.e who needs to review it > > and decide? I don't feel qualified, for example :) > > > > (But maybe I just merge it and see who complains ;) > > > > Not that you need to pick o

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Terrain Haze v1.3

2012-04-26 Thread Emilian Huminiuc
On Thursday 26 April 2012 12:20:36 Renk Thorsten wrote: > I've just created a merge request containing the recent work I've done for > the haze shaders (haze in water shader, dust effect, Mie scattering on > clouds, ...). > > The procedure described in the wiki to create a merge request did not wo

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Terrain Haze v1.3

2012-04-26 Thread Frederic Bouvier
> One comment - to avoid any problems with merge requests being > lost/ignored - who is this 'aimed' at? I.e who needs to review it > and decide? I don't feel qualified, for example :) > > (But maybe I just merge it and see who complains ;) > > Not that you need to pick on any one person, but if

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Terrain Haze v1.3

2012-04-26 Thread James Turner
On 26 Apr 2012, at 13:20, Renk Thorsten wrote: > > I've just created a merge request containing the recent work I've done for > the haze shaders (haze in water shader, dust effect, Mie scattering on > clouds, ...). > > The procedure described in the wiki to create a merge request did not work

[Flightgear-devel] Terrain Haze v1.3

2012-04-26 Thread Renk Thorsten
I've just created a merge request containing the recent work I've done for the haze shaders (haze in water shader, dust effect, Mie scattering on clouds, ...). The procedure described in the wiki to create a merge request did not work for me, I could not push a local branch containing my change

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Random Buildings

2012-04-26 Thread Stuart Buchanan
2012/4/26 Björn Kesten : > Vivian: > > A combination of canopy features with individual features scattered > around the edge? > Just like in the Enemy Engaged series of helicopter sims? > > (See picture) > http://www.nexgam.de/media/cache/nexgam/img/articles/8753/Enemy-Engaged-Comanche-vs-Hokum-1.j

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Random Buildings

2012-04-26 Thread Björn Kesten
Vivian: It surely isn't, but who cares, as long as it works. (It works very well in Enemy Engaged and still looks quite good, despite being from 1999 (original version).) B. -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusiv

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Random Buildings

2012-04-26 Thread Vivian Meazza
Björn > > Vivian: > > A combination of canopy features with individual features scattered around > the edge? > Just like in the Enemy Engaged series of helicopter sims? > > (See picture) > http://www.nexgam.de/media/cache/nexgam/img/articles/8753/Enemy- > Engaged-Comanche-vs-Hokum-1.jpg > > I

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Random Buildings

2012-04-26 Thread Björn Kesten
Vivian: A combination of canopy features with individual features scattered around the edge? Just like in the Enemy Engaged series of helicopter sims? (See picture) http://www.nexgam.de/media/cache/nexgam/img/articles/8753/Enemy-Engaged-Comanche-vs-Hokum-1.jpg I say this would be a viable option

Re: [Flightgear-devel] An empassioned plea

2012-04-26 Thread Björn Kesten
Vic: I was kidding. B. -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endp

Re: [Flightgear-devel] An empassioned plea

2012-04-26 Thread Vic Marriott
>>> Bj?rn Kesten said, I don't want no friggin' wizard to tell me what I can or can't do... ;) <<< Is this a wind-up, or what. How can a simple request for developers to optimise their coding on new improvements end up with statements like this? I was hoping this thread had served it's purpose

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Random Buildings

2012-04-26 Thread James Turner
On 25 Apr 2012, at 14:56, Stuart Buchanan wrote: > If you're going to be looking in the code anyway, the depth of the > quad tree is set in some constants at the top of the SGBuildingBin.cxx > file, and (IIRC) the LoD range is also set up there, so you could see > if reducing the depth makes a di

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Issue 717: Disabling advanced weather crashes the sim

2012-04-26 Thread Renk Thorsten
> So, maybe we could find a better method of switching between the weather > systems - though this isn't the main issue here. Using radio buttons or > a drop-down list would be a more standard way to toggle between > alternatives. Otherwise, just updating (and maybe moving) the button > description

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Random Buildings

2012-04-26 Thread Frederic Bouvier
Hi Stuart, > On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 10:33 AM, Renk Thorsten wrote: > > Hm... I'm getting good performance, but the rendering of the random > > buildings do not seem to go via model-default.eff - they respond > > to the normal visibility, but not to the terrain haze layer, so > > they remain visib