Do you mean CDash or Thermite? CDash has certainly been useful in identifying problem and helping to keep PolyVox/Thermite cross-platform. Glad you like it!

Running on almost exactly those specs on Linux I've managed to get PolyVox, QtOgre and Thermite compiling and running now. Hopefully my changes haven't broken anything but they were all fairly minor.


Sounds promising. I'll be interested to see how this progresses. I'm still planning on putting in some hooks to make it easier to create a GUI/HUD type thing (an overlay basically) using a QGraphicsView or QML for QtOgre.


I haven't actually tried running the samples since your changes but it compiles OK.

_________________
Matt Williams
Linux/CMake guy

Really?! That's awesome. I thought Thermite would require a fair bit of work. I guess it helps a lot now that Bullet is optional. Did you actually manage to open any scenes (the castle is the smallest)? If so post a screenshot Was the interaction and framerate ok?

Yep, sounds good. I haven't really looked at the QML stuff yet but I think it has a lot of potential. But even just constraining widgets to stay within the main window would be progress. Maybe it's as simple as as setting the parenting up properly?

I did test the sample and it ran fine.

I haven't managed to load any scenes. It's been a while and so I forget how to. Is it just a case of running Thermite with --appname? Where are the samples kept? I can't find them in SVN .

I disabled Bullet while compiling because in the past it's been a problem. However, If I can get the rest working then I'll move on to getting it working with Bullet enabled.

Once I get something that looks nice I'll put a screenshot up here.


I'm not sure. I'll need to have more of a play around with it. I'm not sure how possible it it to put restrictions like that on child windows since they really are separate windows at the moment (right?) rather than normal widgets. I'll have a look though.

_________________
Matt Williams
Linux/CMake guy

As I recall, appname is just the name of a folder which Thermite searches for in ../share/thermite/apps/. In fact, it just builds this path and passes it to Ogre as as resource directory. Search for 'appname' in the source and it should become clear. But don't worry too much - I'll give it a go myself at some point so then I can tell you for sure.



There's a 'TechDemo' folder nect to the PolyVox and Thermite ones in SVN. You need to move this to the folder described above.



I wouldn't bother - I don't think it works on Windows at the moment. The Bullet integration has proved the concept but I think it needs re-writing as Thermite has evolved. And probably with a more direct interface (without OgreBullet I mean).



Well, we can discuss it a bit at the weekend. I'll need to refresh my memory about how that code works. They are seperate widgets, and I think we talked about changing that. We discussed creating an invisible widget, and then drawing the widgets directly onto that?

Anyway, the scripting stuff is interesting. But I think I might switch to Linux for a bit because I can't get the bindings generator to compile under VS2010. I'm sure they'll fix it for Qt 4.7 final.

I've just noticed that this dashboard has gone down for some reason... I checked it as a couple of people have been reporting compile errors on Linux. Any idea what is wrong with it? I guess the university machine has stopped running the nightly builds? As you are in Switzerland, do we need a new way of submitting these builds? Maybe the webserver can be set up to do it...

Yes, it turns out that the University box that was running the nightly build has been decommissioned. I should have no trouble getting another box to run the builds since it doesn't affect any of the day-to-day running. I simply haven't got round to it yet. I've been trying to keep on to of the compilation myself but it's not the same as nightly builds.

Otherwise, I do have access to the GCC compile farm which would be a good way of testing it with a number of different compilers. I'll look into it while I'm home over Christmas.

_________________
Matt Williams
Linux/CMake guy

Sure, the GCC compile farm also sounds good. But in order to be effective it would also be good to add some more unit tests, because so much of PolyVox is templatised and therefore not actually compiled unless it is used. Maybe I can add some of these over Christmas, as I won't have access to my main machine for working on Thermite.

Yes, I agree. There's been a few cases where PolyVox has compiled fine but then Thermite has failed due to a problem in the templated headers of PolyVox. I can look into getting better compilation coverage in PolyVox but I'm unsure about actual functionality tests.

The framework for the tests is obviously already set up and I make sure I always run the tests after compilation. You can submit them them yourself manually by building the Experimental target in your IDE or with make Experimental in Linux. Maybe I should add this information to the manual?

Running Experimental will upload the results to the dashboard and will be visible on the main dashboard with further information available to us too.

_________________
Matt Williams
Linux/CMake guy