Objectives Editor Gui

[Ishtvan]

I like the idea of triggering things when one objective is completed or failed. This is as easy to define as the completion/failure script settings and sounds quite powerful. I think I'll add support for this when I get home.

 

Okay, I could do this also if you have a lot of stuff to do, but I might not get to it 'till later in the week. So if you feel like doing it go ahead.

 

(Technically, it would be trivial for mappers to write that activate() call in the completion script, but I learned that mappers don't tend to like scripting at all or are even afraid of it. Currently only Dram and angua are using scripts in their maps.)

Yeah, I also get that impression. So anything we can do to use existing systems with userfriendly editors to do script-like things will be helpful.

[greebo]

@Betamappers: is anybody willing to try out the objectives editor during the next weekend? I think the GUI will be done by then and I need somebody who tries to set up a few objectives in his maps.

[greebo]

Okay, I could do this also if you have a lot of stuff to do, but I might not get to it 'till later in the week. So if you feel like doing it go ahead.

I implemented this today. Although not tested yet it should work fine, the code is straight forward. I also updated the wiki and the objectives editor.

[Ishtvan]

Cool. It's funny, I actually found it as a task on our old forum-based programming TODO list, which I was updating the other day, but I had completely forgotten about it. Now it can be moved to completed tasks.

[greebo]

Hm, are there any tasks left in your ToDo-thread that aren't listed on the bugtracker yet? Ideally, they should be moved there, we're almost exclusively using the bugtracker now (even for maps).

[Ishtvan]

I think they're all on the tracker, I can check later. Some of the misc. physics bugs might not be there. The ony advantage to that list was it showed what subsystems/subtasks are required for a particular system, which was useful when organizing what to do for a completely new system. But since we don't have many (any?) completely new systems left to add, it's probably not needed.

[greebo]

I have a new test version of DarkRadiant available now, containing the current state of the objectives editor:

 

http://darkradiant.sourceforge.net/snapshot.php

 

The version is 0.9.7pre14 and can almost considered a release candidate for 0.9.7.

 

I'd appreciate if anybody who has experience with setting up objectives (and maybe even those who have none) tries out this build and lets me know if it works (also check if the produced objectives are working in-game).

[Tels]

I have a new test version of DarkRadiant available now, containing the current state of the objectives editor:

 

http://darkradiant.sourceforge.net/snapshot.php

 

The version is 0.9.7pre14 and can almost considered a release candidate for 0.9.7.

 

I'd appreciate if anybody who has experience with setting up objectives (and maybe even those who have none) tries out this build and lets me know if it works (also check if the produced objectives are working in-game).

 

The snapshot only has a windows exe, so I checked out the latest DR snapshot from SVN and compiled it on my laptop (Ubuntu). However, upon loading a map, I can't seem to find how to actually start this editor. Is ti maybe not compiled in, or am I just blind?

[OrbWeaver]

Make sure you ./configure with --enable-darkmod-plugins on Linux, it is not enabled by default. If the Objectives Editor is compiled it will be available in the Map menu.

[Tels]

Make sure you ./configure with --enable-darkmod-plugins on Linux, it is not enabled by default. If the Objectives Editor is compiled it will be available in the Map menu.

 

Ah.

 

Seems the wiki is outdated:

 

http://wiki.thedarkmod.com/index.php/...lation_Problems

 

Also,

 

http://wiki.thedarkmod.com/index.php/...ion_Guide#Linux

 

links to:

 

http://wiki.thedarkmod.com/index.php/...mpilation_Guide

 

which doesn't mention Linux at all.

 

Anyway, compiling it now on linux. Might take half an hour or so to complete.

[greebo]

http://wiki.thedarkmod.com/index.php/...mpilation_Guide

 

which doesn't mention Linux at all.

Look closer.

[OrbWeaver]

Actually I just compiled and the Objectives Editor does not load on Linux due to a missing symbol. Almost certainly this is because the Linux build script needs to be updated, I will investigate.

 

EDIT: I have now updated the Makefile.am with some additional .cpp files, and the plugin loads on Linux.

[greebo]

Actually I just compiled and the Objectives Editor does not load on Linux due to a missing symbol. Almost certainly this is because the Linux build script needs to be updated, I will investigate.

Ah, yes, sorry I forgot to mention the build scripts being out of date. I intended to do this myself, but I repressed that.

[Tels]

Actually I just compiled and the Objectives Editor does not load on Linux due to a missing symbol. Almost certainly this is because the Linux build script needs to be updated, I will investigate.

 

EDIT: I have now updated the Makefile.am with some additional .cpp files, and the plugin loads on Linux.

 

Ah duh! I tried it yesterday and saw the difficulty editor but couldn't fiure out how that relates to the objective editor and then gave up trying it. Will recompile.

 

The only complaint I have so far is that the "entity class list selector" in the difficulty editor is a drop-down list. It should be a tree, so you don't have to scroll through a few thousand doom3 unrelated classes to find the one you looking for

[greebo]

I have a new test version of DarkRadiant available now, containing the current state of the objectives editor:

 

http://darkradiant.sourceforge.net/snapshot.php

 

The version is 0.9.7pre14 and can almost considered a release candidate for 0.9.7.

 

I'd appreciate if anybody who has experience with setting up objectives (and maybe even those who have none) tries out this build and lets me know if it works (also check if the produced objectives are working in-game).

So I assume nobody had the time to look at the Objectives Editor yet? In that case I'll just take the current version and release 0.9.7, to widen the audience for gathering more feedback.

 

OrbWeaver, are you fine with that?

[OrbWeaver]

OrbWeaver, are you fine with that?

 

Fine with me. Previous releases have included broken Objectives Editors in any case, so your mostly-completed version will be an improvement even if it still has issues remaining.

[greebo]

Ok, I'll try to prepare the release package within the next few days then. It's been a long time since 0.9.6 anyway, so I'm looking forward to getting this out of the door and focusing on the next large coding packages for 0.9.8.

[greebo]

@OrbWeaver: I uploaded the Win32 file release to the sourceforge page, but the release is still hidden. I'm going to update the website in the evening when I get home (I can't connect to an SFTP server from within my company, strangely).

 

How much time do you need for a debian package?

[OrbWeaver]

I should be able to do the Debian package today, it's fairly simple.

[greebo]

Sounds good.

 

We can also start to define the development roadmap for DarkRadiant 0.9.8. I already have a few bugs in mind which I want to see fixed in the next version, but these are not that time-consuming. What do you suggest as our major item for the next release? I could think of either starting to work on the renderer, refactor the entity hierarchy, improve the shader system, better texture handling (better DDS support plus memory management) or the conversation editor GUI. We can also leave a major item out and just stabilise on the basis of 0.9.7, but I think one major issue resolved would be nice.

 

Btw: You just beat me by ten minutes when creating the 0.9.7 release tag.

[OrbWeaver]

OK, the .deb is now added to the release. I have not changed the release status to Active in case there was anything else you wanted to do first.

 

Regarding the development work for 0.9.8, I agree that it probably is necessary to start looking at the renderer. Although this is obviously a large task, it would still be worth determining what is realistically feasible; for example I have been poking around a bit in an attempt to get vertex colours in, and it might be good to see if we can get the model preview to use the same renderer as the camera view.

 

The Conversation Editor is also a good candidate, although it's probably something you could whip up in a couple of hours.

 

(Sorry I didn't realise you were planning to create the tag, I created it so I could use it to do the svn export which is the first step in the DEB build process).

[greebo]

OK, the .deb is now added to the release. I have not changed the release status to Active in case there was anything else you wanted to do first.

Thanks. I wanted to update the website first with the changelog, RSS and everything.

 

Regarding the development work for 0.9.8, I agree that it probably is necessary to start looking at the renderer. Although this is obviously a large task, it would still be worth determining what is realistically feasible; for example I have been poking around a bit in an attempt to get vertex colours in, and it might be good to see if we can get the model preview to use the same renderer as the camera view.

So it shall be the rendering code then. I don't have any overview at all about what is necessary to get a decent D3 support in there, but this will be interesting and tough.

 

The Conversation Editor is also a good candidate, although it's probably something you could whip up in a couple of hours.

A couple of hours? It probably takes me an entire weekend at least, GUIs are so tiresome to create. Nonetheless it's something I would need to do myself, as I know the conversation system best.

 

(Sorry I didn't realise you were planning to create the tag, I created it so I could use it to do the svn export which is the first step in the DEB build process).

No need to apologise at all, it doesn't matter who actually creates the tag.

[OrbWeaver]

A couple of hours? It probably takes me an entire weekend at least, GUIs are so tiresome to create. Nonetheless it's something I would need to do myself, as I know the conversation system best.

 

I was exaggerating a bit. Obviously it will take more than two hours, but you would still do it in a fraction of the time it would take me to do another editor.

[greebo]

Ok, suspected so. But to your defense I must add that the objective system is quite some beast to write a GUI for - much harder than the Stim/Response or Difficulty Editor.

 

I'll start associating a few issues to the new release version then to populate the roadmap. The renderer issue will have to be divided into child tasks, I guess.