Project Orbiter Racing League (Offline) Dev Thread

[wehaveaproblem]

Excellent stuff, computerex, nice one. I await the update... no hurry of course.

I couldn't get that link to open btw.

 

[computerex]

It keeps track of when the checkpoint is passed, currently it shows the pass velocity and time. Is there anything else that needs to be cached?

As for having independent pages, I made it so that you can have multiple MFD instances that function independently from the others. This is in my opinion a far elegant solution then to map the page with mfd identifiers, which I can see can cause issues.

 

[Linguofreak]

I notice that the stands and billboards are mis-aligned with the runways on the KSC course.

 

[computerex]

I notice that the stands and billboards are mis-aligned with the runways on the KSC course.

Screen shot?

 

[wehaveaproblem]

Thanks Linguofreak, I'm at work so cannot check this until later, but my first reaction to that would be that we likely have different KSC versions installed, with slightly different runway positions - a similar problem to the pad alignments and whatnot.

I think I set it up with the hi-res KSC pack, I think. Do you have that installed?

 

[Starshipexplorer]

hi wehave. I have the hi-res KSC by kukanotas and noticed that the start/finish lines were abit "off-center" but using the scenario editor "relocated" them to the KSC and CCAS runways. Was just a "minor " edit. BTW...great work on this.

 

[wehaveaproblem]

lol, in which case, starship, I designed them without the hi-res... or something... :leaving:


I'll look into it properly later, thanks for the headsup.

 

[Hielor]

lol, in which case, starship, I designed them without the hi-res... or something... :leaving:


I'll look into it properly later, thanks for the headsup.

May also want to check it in the new Orbiter beta, I think the runway's moving...

 

[Linguofreak]

Thanks Linguofreak, I'm at work so cannot check this until later, but my first reaction to that would be that we likely have different KSC versions installed, with slightly different runway positions - a similar problem to the pad alignments and whatnot.

I think I set it up with the hi-res KSC pack, I think. Do you have that installed?

No, it's not the position of the runway, that's just about right. It's the heading of the runway versus the strip defined by the stands and billboards.

And this time I can't reproduce it. All alignments are spot on today. Weird... :huh:

 

[wehaveaproblem]

ah so it was a ghost in the machine... interesting.

 

[Face]

No, it's not the position of the runway, that's just about right. It's the heading of the runway versus the strip defined by the stands and billboards.

And this time I can't reproduce it. All alignments are spot on today. Weird... :huh:

I got that quite often, too. But it was always due to loading the wrong chkpt file IIRC.

regards,
Face

 

[wehaveaproblem]

That's odd, Face, as the start finish lines are vessels in the scn file...

Computerex has just coded in dynamic loading of the checkpoints by the rcmfd based on selected scenario. But I think start and finish meshes will still have to be manually put into the scenario, I think.

Anyhoo, interesting to know this stuff guys, thanks. I should have an updated release soon enough.

 

[computerex]

That's odd, Face, as the start finish lines are vessels in the scn file...

Computerex has just coded in dynamic loading of the checkpoints by the rcmfd based on selected scenario. But I think start and finish meshes will still have to be manually put into the scenario, I think.

Anyhoo, interesting to know this stuff guys, thanks. I should have an updated release soon enough.

No my friend, on the run checkpoint loading was implemented in the beta . The MFD loads everything, including the start/stop vessels. That is why when you simply tried to do a rename of the config files, you would get an error because the MFD had references to the start/stop vessels. The scenarios simply aren't updated (in the OH release), and still contain the redundant vessel definitions in the scenario files. It doesn't cause any problems because the MFD does a scan of all the checkpoints/start/stop vessels and deletes them before creating it's own. The last two packages I sent you though contain the updated scenarios with the checkpoint vessels removed from the scenario files.

Face, you know I am a DVCS noob, so can I just send you the updated package to check in the repos ?

 

[Face]

Face, you know I am a DVCS noob, so can I just send you the updated package to check in the repos ?

Of course. If you have it in a repo already you will miss the history, though. In this case it would be better you send me the bundles. You can create a bundle file that represents all your changes w.r.t. the BitBucket repo by using this command-line in the repo's directory:

hg bundle <bundle-filename> http://bitbucket.org/face/orl-offline

If you send it to me this way, it will preserve all your credits and timestamps and intermediate changesets.

But a snapshot ZIP would suffice, too...

regards,
Face

 

[wehaveaproblem]

oooh computerex, I seee. No wonder I felt like I'd missed a trick. I figured the repo I got from Face had all your latest BETA changes. I shall have to update the pack on OH asap. We might as well add in the sounds and stuff first though. If I can't find the time today, I will do that for you tomo eve.

Cheers for clearing things up.

 

[cinder1992]

Fixed the KSC checkpoint heading bug. hereyago:View attachment ORL_bugfix.zip

btw, I don't know how you managed to miss that bug. but still, take it.

 

[wehaveaproblem]

I basically missed that bug due to the latest files I'd recieved not actually being the latest. The beta has not been running solidly all this time. Rather it ran very intensly a while back and then stopped. Only now did I decide to finally package and release it. Whatsmore the beta involved a large portion of multiplayer stuff which is irrelevant to this release. So basically the files I got weren't the latest deved files and the mfd had new features, hence the release having some issues. It will all be cleared up in the next update. Cheers tho Cinders.

 

[agentgonzo]

I basically missed that bug due to the latest files I'd recieved not actually being the latest. The beta has not been running solidly all this time. Rather it ran very intensly a while back and then stopped. Only now did I decide to finally package and release it. Whatsmore the beta involved a large portion of multiplayer stuff which is irrelevant to this release. So basically the files I got weren't the latest deved files and the mfd had new features, hence the release having some issues. It will all be cleared up in the next update. Cheers tho Cinders.

Have you considered using an online software repository. Sourceforge is very good, allowing CVS, Subversion and Git access to the repositories. I would imagine that Google Code would do the same thing. They are free and very easy to set up/use. This prevents the need to pass around files and get into the configuration problems you are having.

 

[wehaveaproblem]

Yeah there is one set up for the OMP stuff, agent. Trouble was I forgot how to access it when I came back to release the first package x months later, so I got face to gimme a DL instead. That DL contained the updated MFD, but not the updated scenarios.

 

[Face]

Yeah there is one set up for the OMP stuff, agent. Trouble was I forgot how to access it when I came back to release the first package x months later, so I got face to gimme a DL instead. That DL contained the updated MFD, but not the updated scenarios.

FYI: Computerex mailed me the latest MFD snapshot. I commited it to the repository at http://bitbucket.org/face/orl-offline . You can always get the latest snapshot as ZIP archive from there: http://bitbucket.org/face/orl-offline/get/tip.zip

regards,
Face

BTW: Sourceforge supports CVS, Subversion, Git, Mercurial and Bazaar. Google Code only supports Subversion and Mercurial.