[opensource-dev] UI - Picks - no delete button

[Ann Otoole]

So exactly how do I delete a pick? Oh never mind. I have to get a third party 
viewer to do it. Great.



  ___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] UI - Picks - no delete button

[Geenz]

It's totally not Right click on the pick -> Delete. It's totally not click on 
the pick in question, then click on the trash can icon at the bottom of "My 
Picks".
On Wednesday, February 16, 2011 at 3:39 AM, Ann Otoole wrote: 
> So exactly how do I delete a pick? Oh never mind. I have to get a third party 
> viewer to do it. Great.
> 
> ___
> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
> 
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

[opensource-dev] Review build

[Oz Linden (Scott Lawrence)]

The next review build is:

http://automated-builds-secondlife-com.s3.amazonaws.com/hg/repo/oz_project-3/rev/221226/index.html

and includes:

STORM-680  Avaline callers 
are added to the Recent list
STORM-974  UI button 
alignment issues in Landmark panel, About Land window, and Hardware 
Settings window
STORM-979  selection 
outline from inventory bottom panel buttons is cut at the left side when 
clicked.
STORM-980  Appearance panel 
/ Wear button is too wide


these are not yet in viewer-development, but are candidates for integration.

___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] UI - Picks - no delete button

[Ann Otoole]

I don't see any trashcan. Expected. Looked. Not there. v2.5. No way to delete 
picks.




From: Geenz 
To: Ann Otoole 
Cc: opensource-dev@lists.secondlife.com
Sent: Wed, February 16, 2011 4:42:11 AM
Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] UI - Picks - no delete button


It's totally not Right click on the pick -> Delete.  It's totally not click on 
the pick in question, then click on the trash can icon at the bottom of "My 
Picks".
 
On Wednesday, February 16, 2011 at 3:39 AM, Ann Otoole wrote:
So exactly how do I delete a pick? Oh never mind. I have to get a third party 
viewer to do it. Great.
>
>
>___
>Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
>http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
>Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
> 



  ___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] UI - Picks - no delete button

[Tiggs Linden]

The trashcan is not in the web profile, it's in the viewer sidebar.
Same place as it was before.

Tiggs

On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 10:33 AM, Ann Otoole  wrote:
>
> I don't see any trashcan. Expected. Looked. Not there. v2.5. No way to
> delete picks.
>
> 
> From: Geenz 
> To: Ann Otoole 
> Cc: opensource-dev@lists.secondlife.com
> Sent: Wed, February 16, 2011 4:42:11 AM
> Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] UI - Picks - no delete button
>
> It's totally not Right click on the pick -> Delete.  It's totally not click
> on the pick in question, then click on the trash can icon at the bottom of
> "My Picks".
>
> On Wednesday, February 16, 2011 at 3:39 AM, Ann Otoole wrote:
>
> So exactly how do I delete a pick? Oh never mind. I have to get a third
> party viewer to do it. Great.
>
> ___
> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting
> privileges
>
>
>
> ___
> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting
> privileges
>
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] UI - Picks - no delete button

[Trilo Byte]

On the sidebar, "My Profile" and then click on the "My Picks" tab.  Right click 
on and choose delete, or select and then click that trashcan-looking icon at 
the bottom right.  Same way it's been for more than 6 months.

Perhaps the web profile team can add that functionality to what they're doing, 
but I believe that to be a different group.

On Feb 16, 2011, at 1:39 AM, Ann Otoole wrote:

> So exactly how do I delete a pick? Oh never mind. I have to get a third party 
> viewer to do it. Great.
> 
> ___
> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] UI - Picks - no delete button

[Daniel]

What I see on 2.7.0(221148) was:

* At first, trashcan not visible in MyProfile > MyPicks.
* After using right arrow pick info button and then Edit button, 
trashcan appears and works
* Right click on avatar, and MyProfile from list opens a window, but 
does not bring up my web profile the first time,
   it does the second time, but does not show my Picks even though I am 
the owner of the profile.

Having both kinds of profiles and neither of them working right is 
confusing to users.

> From: Ann Otoole
>
> I don't see any trashcan. Expected. Looked. Not there. v2.5. No way to delete
> picks.
>
>
>

___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] Review Request: STORM-977 llmediaplugintest shows up even though -DLL_TESTS:BOOL=OFF has been used

[Merov Linden]

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/144/#review366
---


If you want to bypass the entire make file for llplugintest, it seems to me 
better to do it at the indra/CMakeLists.txt level. There's only one line in 
there that's relevant to llplugintest. Could you try that out?

- Merov


On Feb. 8, 2011, 8:46 a.m., Jonathan Yap wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/144/
> ---
> 
> (Updated Feb. 8, 2011, 8:46 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Viewer.
> 
> 
> Summary
> ---
> 
> llmediaplugintest shows up to be compiled even though -DLL_TESTS:BOOL=OFF has 
> been used on the command line.
> 
> This cmake file does not use the call to LL_ADD_PROJECT_UNIT_TESTS that other 
> cmake files do.  
> 
> LL_ADD_PROJECT_UNIT_TESTS is usually wrapped with if(LL_TESTS)
> 
> I could not figure out which lines suppress the inclusion of 
> copy_plugintest_libs and llmediaplugintest into the list of what is to be 
> built so wrapped the entire file around if(LL_TESTS).  
> 
> If there is some better way to more exactly target these two items please 
> point it out.
> 
> 
> This addresses bug STORM-977.
> http://jira.secondlife.com/browse/STORM-977
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   indra/test_apps/llplugintest/CMakeLists.txt b0bceb572090 
> 
> Diff: http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/144/diff
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Jonathan
> 
>

___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] Review Request: STORM-977 llmediaplugintest shows up even though -DLL_TESTS:BOOL=OFF has been used

[Merov Linden]

> On Feb. 8, 2011, 10:41 a.m., Boroondas Gupte wrote:
> > > If there is some better way to more exactly target these two items please 
> > > point it out.
> > 
> > You should be able to get the same effect when wrapping the only place 
> > where this file is referenced in a LL_TESTS condition, i.e., change 
> > https://bitbucket.org/lindenlab/viewer-development/src/b0bceb572090/indra/CMakeLists.txt#cl-74
> >  from
> > if (NOT LINUX)
> > to
> > if (LL_TESTS AND NOT LINUX)
> > (and the same for the endif, of course)
> > 
> > Whether that's a better place, I don't know.
> > 
> > Though, I think LL_TESTS is the wrong conditional here, anyway. LL_TESTS is 
> > for enabling unit and integration tests. llplugintest however, I have 
> > learned on IRC today, seems to be a fully separate program based on and 
> > similar to uBrowser that could be used to load and test individual 
> > llmediaplugins, would it communicate with them in the same way the viewer 
> > does. (Which, according to MichelleZ, it doesn't, thus potentially 
> > misleading developers of new plugins.)
> > 
> > It should probably not be built unless explicitly requested, thus a new 
> > variable, defaulting to OFF and different from LL_TESTS would suit this 
> > much better. Or, just delete the referencing at 
> > https://bitbucket.org/lindenlab/viewer-development/src/b0bceb572090/indra/CMakeLists.txt#cl-75
> >  completely, thus unconditionally removing it from the dependencies of the 
> > viewer itself, and have those that want to build it explicitly state it as 
> > a build target.

I'm afraid that, if that app is not built by default, it will rapidly rot and 
become unmaintainable. There is value having it built (even if not used) by LL 
devs and TC at least (who all build with LL_TESTS on): make sure we don't add 
viewer dependencies where we don't need any and maintain a clean separation of 
concerns between plugins and hosts.


- Merov


---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/144/#review347
---


On Feb. 8, 2011, 8:46 a.m., Jonathan Yap wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/144/
> ---
> 
> (Updated Feb. 8, 2011, 8:46 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Viewer.
> 
> 
> Summary
> ---
> 
> llmediaplugintest shows up to be compiled even though -DLL_TESTS:BOOL=OFF has 
> been used on the command line.
> 
> This cmake file does not use the call to LL_ADD_PROJECT_UNIT_TESTS that other 
> cmake files do.  
> 
> LL_ADD_PROJECT_UNIT_TESTS is usually wrapped with if(LL_TESTS)
> 
> I could not figure out which lines suppress the inclusion of 
> copy_plugintest_libs and llmediaplugintest into the list of what is to be 
> built so wrapped the entire file around if(LL_TESTS).  
> 
> If there is some better way to more exactly target these two items please 
> point it out.
> 
> 
> This addresses bug STORM-977.
> http://jira.secondlife.com/browse/STORM-977
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   indra/test_apps/llplugintest/CMakeLists.txt b0bceb572090 
> 
> Diff: http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/144/diff
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Jonathan
> 
>

___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] Review Request: STORM-977 llmediaplugintest shows up even though -DLL_TESTS:BOOL=OFF has been used

[Jonathan Yap]

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/144/
---

(Updated Feb. 16, 2011, 11:32 a.m.)


Review request for Viewer.


Changes
---

Updated code per Merov's request and Boroondas' suggestion.


Summary
---

llmediaplugintest shows up to be compiled even though -DLL_TESTS:BOOL=OFF has 
been used on the command line.

This cmake file does not use the call to LL_ADD_PROJECT_UNIT_TESTS that other 
cmake files do.  

LL_ADD_PROJECT_UNIT_TESTS is usually wrapped with if(LL_TESTS)

I could not figure out which lines suppress the inclusion of 
copy_plugintest_libs and llmediaplugintest into the list of what is to be built 
so wrapped the entire file around if(LL_TESTS).  

If there is some better way to more exactly target these two items please point 
it out.


This addresses bug STORM-977.
http://jira.secondlife.com/browse/STORM-977


Diffs (updated)
-

  indra/CMakeLists.txt b0bceb572090 
  indra/test_apps/llplugintest/CMakeLists.txt b0bceb572090 

Diff: http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/144/diff


Testing
---


Thanks,

Jonathan

___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] Review Request: STORM-977 llmediaplugintest shows up even though -DLL_TESTS:BOOL=OFF has been used

[Merov Linden]

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/144/#review368
---

Ship it!


Cleaner! :) I'm assuming you built on Windows and it doesn't create weird 
errors down the road.

- Merov


On Feb. 16, 2011, 11:32 a.m., Jonathan Yap wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/144/
> ---
> 
> (Updated Feb. 16, 2011, 11:32 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Viewer.
> 
> 
> Summary
> ---
> 
> llmediaplugintest shows up to be compiled even though -DLL_TESTS:BOOL=OFF has 
> been used on the command line.
> 
> This cmake file does not use the call to LL_ADD_PROJECT_UNIT_TESTS that other 
> cmake files do.  
> 
> LL_ADD_PROJECT_UNIT_TESTS is usually wrapped with if(LL_TESTS)
> 
> I could not figure out which lines suppress the inclusion of 
> copy_plugintest_libs and llmediaplugintest into the list of what is to be 
> built so wrapped the entire file around if(LL_TESTS).  
> 
> If there is some better way to more exactly target these two items please 
> point it out.
> 
> 
> This addresses bug STORM-977.
> http://jira.secondlife.com/browse/STORM-977
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   indra/CMakeLists.txt b0bceb572090 
>   indra/test_apps/llplugintest/CMakeLists.txt b0bceb572090 
> 
> Diff: http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/144/diff
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Jonathan
> 
>

___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] Review Request: STORM-977 llmediaplugintest shows up even though -DLL_TESTS:BOOL=OFF has been used

[Boroondas Gupte]

> On Feb. 8, 2011, 10:41 a.m., Boroondas Gupte wrote:
> > > If there is some better way to more exactly target these two items please 
> > > point it out.
> > 
> > You should be able to get the same effect when wrapping the only place 
> > where this file is referenced in a LL_TESTS condition, i.e., change 
> > https://bitbucket.org/lindenlab/viewer-development/src/b0bceb572090/indra/CMakeLists.txt#cl-74
> >  from
> > if (NOT LINUX)
> > to
> > if (LL_TESTS AND NOT LINUX)
> > (and the same for the endif, of course)
> > 
> > Whether that's a better place, I don't know.
> > 
> > Though, I think LL_TESTS is the wrong conditional here, anyway. LL_TESTS is 
> > for enabling unit and integration tests. llplugintest however, I have 
> > learned on IRC today, seems to be a fully separate program based on and 
> > similar to uBrowser that could be used to load and test individual 
> > llmediaplugins, would it communicate with them in the same way the viewer 
> > does. (Which, according to MichelleZ, it doesn't, thus potentially 
> > misleading developers of new plugins.)
> > 
> > It should probably not be built unless explicitly requested, thus a new 
> > variable, defaulting to OFF and different from LL_TESTS would suit this 
> > much better. Or, just delete the referencing at 
> > https://bitbucket.org/lindenlab/viewer-development/src/b0bceb572090/indra/CMakeLists.txt#cl-75
> >  completely, thus unconditionally removing it from the dependencies of the 
> > viewer itself, and have those that want to build it explicitly state it as 
> > a build target.
> 
> Merov Linden wrote:
> I'm afraid that, if that app is not built by default, it will rapidly rot 
> and become unmaintainable. There is value having it built (even if not used) 
> by LL devs and TC at least (who all build with LL_TESTS on): make sure we 
> don't add viewer dependencies where we don't need any and maintain a clean 
> separation of concerns between plugins and hosts.

I can see that point. Though, I'd still like a separate variable, if alone to 
avoid people from mistaking llplugintest for a unit or integration test, like I 
initially did. Just have that (new) variable default on ON, then, rather than 
OFF.


- Boroondas


---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/144/#review347
---


On Feb. 16, 2011, 11:32 a.m., Jonathan Yap wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/144/
> ---
> 
> (Updated Feb. 16, 2011, 11:32 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Viewer.
> 
> 
> Summary
> ---
> 
> llmediaplugintest shows up to be compiled even though -DLL_TESTS:BOOL=OFF has 
> been used on the command line.
> 
> This cmake file does not use the call to LL_ADD_PROJECT_UNIT_TESTS that other 
> cmake files do.  
> 
> LL_ADD_PROJECT_UNIT_TESTS is usually wrapped with if(LL_TESTS)
> 
> I could not figure out which lines suppress the inclusion of 
> copy_plugintest_libs and llmediaplugintest into the list of what is to be 
> built so wrapped the entire file around if(LL_TESTS).  
> 
> If there is some better way to more exactly target these two items please 
> point it out.
> 
> 
> This addresses bug STORM-977.
> http://jira.secondlife.com/browse/STORM-977
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   indra/CMakeLists.txt b0bceb572090 
>   indra/test_apps/llplugintest/CMakeLists.txt b0bceb572090 
> 
> Diff: http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/144/diff
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Jonathan
> 
>

___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] Review Request: STORM-977 llmediaplugintest shows up even though -DLL_TESTS:BOOL=OFF has been used

[Jonathan Yap]

> On Feb. 8, 2011, 10:41 a.m., Boroondas Gupte wrote:
> > > If there is some better way to more exactly target these two items please 
> > > point it out.
> > 
> > You should be able to get the same effect when wrapping the only place 
> > where this file is referenced in a LL_TESTS condition, i.e., change 
> > https://bitbucket.org/lindenlab/viewer-development/src/b0bceb572090/indra/CMakeLists.txt#cl-74
> >  from
> > if (NOT LINUX)
> > to
> > if (LL_TESTS AND NOT LINUX)
> > (and the same for the endif, of course)
> > 
> > Whether that's a better place, I don't know.
> > 
> > Though, I think LL_TESTS is the wrong conditional here, anyway. LL_TESTS is 
> > for enabling unit and integration tests. llplugintest however, I have 
> > learned on IRC today, seems to be a fully separate program based on and 
> > similar to uBrowser that could be used to load and test individual 
> > llmediaplugins, would it communicate with them in the same way the viewer 
> > does. (Which, according to MichelleZ, it doesn't, thus potentially 
> > misleading developers of new plugins.)
> > 
> > It should probably not be built unless explicitly requested, thus a new 
> > variable, defaulting to OFF and different from LL_TESTS would suit this 
> > much better. Or, just delete the referencing at 
> > https://bitbucket.org/lindenlab/viewer-development/src/b0bceb572090/indra/CMakeLists.txt#cl-75
> >  completely, thus unconditionally removing it from the dependencies of the 
> > viewer itself, and have those that want to build it explicitly state it as 
> > a build target.
> 
> Merov Linden wrote:
> I'm afraid that, if that app is not built by default, it will rapidly rot 
> and become unmaintainable. There is value having it built (even if not used) 
> by LL devs and TC at least (who all build with LL_TESTS on): make sure we 
> don't add viewer dependencies where we don't need any and maintain a clean 
> separation of concerns between plugins and hosts.
> 
> Boroondas Gupte wrote:
> I can see that point. Though, I'd still like a separate variable, if 
> alone to avoid people from mistaking llplugintest for a unit or integration 
> test, like I initially did. Just have that (new) variable default on ON, 
> then, rather than OFF.

New variable name aside, would it make it clearer what this module does if it 
were renamed to something more obvious?  One person pointed out to me that 
lltestplugin might be a better choice.


- Jonathan


---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/144/#review347
---


On Feb. 16, 2011, 11:32 a.m., Jonathan Yap wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/144/
> ---
> 
> (Updated Feb. 16, 2011, 11:32 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Viewer.
> 
> 
> Summary
> ---
> 
> llmediaplugintest shows up to be compiled even though -DLL_TESTS:BOOL=OFF has 
> been used on the command line.
> 
> This cmake file does not use the call to LL_ADD_PROJECT_UNIT_TESTS that other 
> cmake files do.  
> 
> LL_ADD_PROJECT_UNIT_TESTS is usually wrapped with if(LL_TESTS)
> 
> I could not figure out which lines suppress the inclusion of 
> copy_plugintest_libs and llmediaplugintest into the list of what is to be 
> built so wrapped the entire file around if(LL_TESTS).  
> 
> If there is some better way to more exactly target these two items please 
> point it out.
> 
> 
> This addresses bug STORM-977.
> http://jira.secondlife.com/browse/STORM-977
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   indra/CMakeLists.txt b0bceb572090 
>   indra/test_apps/llplugintest/CMakeLists.txt b0bceb572090 
> 
> Diff: http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/144/diff
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Jonathan
> 
>

___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

[opensource-dev] Hacking up to Visual Studio 2010 ...

[Oz Linden (Scott Lawrence)]

Tomorrow and Friday (Feb 17 & 18), Linden Lab is going to be holding an 
in-house Hackathon (stopping work on many other things, getting many 
developers together all at once, and focusing on getting a lot done in 
short time) to upgrade our builds of all our libraries and the viewer to 
a new toolchain, including our new package management tool (autobuild 
) and Visual Studio 2010 for 
Windows (yes... about time... whatever... we're doing it).


Our goals are simply stated:

  1. Get all open source components into repositories under
 hg.secondlife.com (eg bitbucket.org/lindenlab/).  All the third
 party components (things not created by LL) that we incorporate
 will be in repositories named with the prefix "3p-".  Most of
 these repositories exist now, but not all have sources in them yet.
  2. Get each component packaged with an autobuild configuration for
 whatever platforms it is needed on.
  3. Get each component needed on Windows building under autobuild with
 VS 2010.
  4. Get a TeamCity-automated build configured for each component
 repository with the resulting prebuilds of open components
 uploaded to public directories.
  5. Get the viewer built using the resulting prebuilt libraries, also
 under autobuild with VS 2010.

We also expect to integrate some automated viewer testing into our 
automated viewer builds, but none of that will be externally visible.


If you make a chart with a row for each component, and a column for each 
of 1 through 4 above, it's a lot of boxes to fill in... many have 
already been done: there are some complete rows, but it's still a big job.


I will be providing public updates on the wiki (form and location TBD... 
watch this thread) and on the #opensl IRC channel of how we're doing and 
the status of each public repository.


A non-goal for the Lindens is building the components with Visual Studio 
Express.  There is currently a limitation (see OPEN-1 in jira) that 
makes using Express cumbersome (it requires separate configuration). We 
do recognize that Express is important to open developers, and want it 
to be supported, but there's only so much we can do ourselves in two 
days.  There is an autobuild configuration checked in for building the 
viewer under autobuild including VS Express: 
http://bitbucket.org/oz_linden/viewer-autobuild



I'm going to try to get some supporting documentation up on the wiki 
today or early tomorrow.  It should be possible for open developers to 
help us test whether or not the component builds can be used in Express 
as we go along.  If people want to do that and feed me changes, I'll try 
to get them incorporated in real time as much as possible.


Once all this is done (and it probably will not be merged to 
viewer-development immediately after the hackathon), this new toolchain 
will be the "supported" way to build the viewer and its dependencies, 
which means that if you really need to build with other tools, you'll 
have to work out how to do so - we'll consider accepting changes to 
support them so long as they're reasonably clean and don't break the 
standard way of doing it.   Maintaining support for building with older 
versions of Visual Studio will _not_ be a goal, and getting review time 
for them will probably be hard.






___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] Review Request: STORM-977 llmediaplugintest shows up even though -DLL_TESTS:BOOL=OFF has been used

[Jonathan Yap]

> On Feb. 16, 2011, 12:07 p.m., Merov Linden wrote:
> > Cleaner! :) I'm assuming you built on Windows and it doesn't create weird 
> > errors down the road.

I have built it on windows, started the viewer up, walked/flew around a bit.


- Jonathan


---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/144/#review368
---


On Feb. 16, 2011, 11:32 a.m., Jonathan Yap wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/144/
> ---
> 
> (Updated Feb. 16, 2011, 11:32 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Viewer.
> 
> 
> Summary
> ---
> 
> llmediaplugintest shows up to be compiled even though -DLL_TESTS:BOOL=OFF has 
> been used on the command line.
> 
> This cmake file does not use the call to LL_ADD_PROJECT_UNIT_TESTS that other 
> cmake files do.  
> 
> LL_ADD_PROJECT_UNIT_TESTS is usually wrapped with if(LL_TESTS)
> 
> I could not figure out which lines suppress the inclusion of 
> copy_plugintest_libs and llmediaplugintest into the list of what is to be 
> built so wrapped the entire file around if(LL_TESTS).  
> 
> If there is some better way to more exactly target these two items please 
> point it out.
> 
> 
> This addresses bug STORM-977.
> http://jira.secondlife.com/browse/STORM-977
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   indra/CMakeLists.txt b0bceb572090 
>   indra/test_apps/llplugintest/CMakeLists.txt b0bceb572090 
> 
> Diff: http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/144/diff
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Jonathan
> 
>

___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] Review Request: STORM-977 llmediaplugintest shows up even though -DLL_TESTS:BOOL=OFF has been used

[Boroondas Gupte]

> On Feb. 8, 2011, 10:41 a.m., Boroondas Gupte wrote:
> > > If there is some better way to more exactly target these two items please 
> > > point it out.
> > 
> > You should be able to get the same effect when wrapping the only place 
> > where this file is referenced in a LL_TESTS condition, i.e., change 
> > https://bitbucket.org/lindenlab/viewer-development/src/b0bceb572090/indra/CMakeLists.txt#cl-74
> >  from
> > if (NOT LINUX)
> > to
> > if (LL_TESTS AND NOT LINUX)
> > (and the same for the endif, of course)
> > 
> > Whether that's a better place, I don't know.
> > 
> > Though, I think LL_TESTS is the wrong conditional here, anyway. LL_TESTS is 
> > for enabling unit and integration tests. llplugintest however, I have 
> > learned on IRC today, seems to be a fully separate program based on and 
> > similar to uBrowser that could be used to load and test individual 
> > llmediaplugins, would it communicate with them in the same way the viewer 
> > does. (Which, according to MichelleZ, it doesn't, thus potentially 
> > misleading developers of new plugins.)
> > 
> > It should probably not be built unless explicitly requested, thus a new 
> > variable, defaulting to OFF and different from LL_TESTS would suit this 
> > much better. Or, just delete the referencing at 
> > https://bitbucket.org/lindenlab/viewer-development/src/b0bceb572090/indra/CMakeLists.txt#cl-75
> >  completely, thus unconditionally removing it from the dependencies of the 
> > viewer itself, and have those that want to build it explicitly state it as 
> > a build target.
> 
> Merov Linden wrote:
> I'm afraid that, if that app is not built by default, it will rapidly rot 
> and become unmaintainable. There is value having it built (even if not used) 
> by LL devs and TC at least (who all build with LL_TESTS on): make sure we 
> don't add viewer dependencies where we don't need any and maintain a clean 
> separation of concerns between plugins and hosts.
> 
> Boroondas Gupte wrote:
> I can see that point. Though, I'd still like a separate variable, if 
> alone to avoid people from mistaking llplugintest for a unit or integration 
> test, like I initially did. Just have that (new) variable default on ON, 
> then, rather than OFF.
> 
> Jonathan Yap wrote:
> New variable name aside, would it make it clearer what this module does 
> if it were renamed to something more obvious?  One person pointed out to me 
> that lltestplugin might be a better choice.

> New variable name aside, would it make it clearer what this module does if it 
> were renamed to something more obvious?
Yes! Though to what?

> One person pointed out to me that lltestplugin might be a better choice.
That might have been me, back when I thought it was a test plugin, which it 
apparently isn't, either.


- Boroondas


---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/144/#review347
---


On Feb. 16, 2011, 11:32 a.m., Jonathan Yap wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/144/
> ---
> 
> (Updated Feb. 16, 2011, 11:32 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Viewer.
> 
> 
> Summary
> ---
> 
> llmediaplugintest shows up to be compiled even though -DLL_TESTS:BOOL=OFF has 
> been used on the command line.
> 
> This cmake file does not use the call to LL_ADD_PROJECT_UNIT_TESTS that other 
> cmake files do.  
> 
> LL_ADD_PROJECT_UNIT_TESTS is usually wrapped with if(LL_TESTS)
> 
> I could not figure out which lines suppress the inclusion of 
> copy_plugintest_libs and llmediaplugintest into the list of what is to be 
> built so wrapped the entire file around if(LL_TESTS).  
> 
> If there is some better way to more exactly target these two items please 
> point it out.
> 
> 
> This addresses bug STORM-977.
> http://jira.secondlife.com/browse/STORM-977
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   indra/CMakeLists.txt b0bceb572090 
>   indra/test_apps/llplugintest/CMakeLists.txt b0bceb572090 
> 
> Diff: http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/144/diff
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Jonathan
> 
>

___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges