RFC: Fancy classics

Simon B · Post by **Simon B** » Wed Jan 07, 2009 7:42 am

Is it worth adding "cruiser class" versions?
Technically, the neoboa is the upgrade from the boa class cruiser, and cruiser classes for Anaconda and Python are not classical/canon.

OTOH: pushing the poly count can create some very sleek forms from the models.

There are existing OXPs for anaconda and python class cruisers too - how careful should I be to avoid treading on someone elses oxp-toes?

Commander McLane · Post by **Commander McLane** » Wed Jan 07, 2009 7:58 am

DaddyHoggy wrote:
Ahruman wrote:
wackyman465 wrote:
Yup. I've wondered whether there's a way to convert sketchup files to an oolite-supported model?
According to this, you can import KMZ files (which SketchUp can export) into Blender, which can then export OBJ, which can be converted with the Oolite mesh converter scripts.
The potential for conversion-cock-up is legion...

Indeed. I sometimes try to re-convert Oolite models to Wings, using DryDock to convert from dat to obj. After import to Wings the model usually ends up inverted, or somesuch...

Simon B · Post by **Simon B** » Wed Jan 07, 2009 8:47 am

Ahruman wrote:
Simon B wrote:
@Ahruman - re: poly limits.... now he tells me!
Oi! I told you last week. :-)

Heh - you told me that it would be a non-issue in 1.73 ... not that I can currently get away with 800!

Hmmm.... I think ubuntu is still struggling along with 1.65 in the deb, I can canfirm later, if say, 1.71 can be formally labelled "stable" someplace official-looking, the maintainer may feel motivated to update. Or has that happened already while I've been busy?

Simon B · Post by **Simon B** » Wed Jan 07, 2009 8:51 am

Commander McLane wrote:
Indeed. I sometimes try to re-convert Oolite models to Wings, using DryDock to convert from dat to obj. After import to Wings the model usually ends up inverted, or somesuch... :?

Well oolite seems to invert along the x axis anyway - you are probably just experiencing a faithful conversion.

Oolite seems to use a left-handed coordinate system...

But lets not stray too far OT ;)

Post by **another_commander** » Wed Jan 07, 2009 8:56 am

Simon B wrote:
Hmmm.... I think ubuntu is still struggling along with 1.65 in the deb, I can canfirm later, if say, 1.71 can be formally labelled "stable" someplace official-looking, the maintainer may feel motivated to update. Or has that happened already while I've been busy?

The problem is that 1.71 is not officially stable. I would also like to see people starting to move away from 1.65, but labeling an arbitrary release as stable is not going to help, in my opinion. We will need to come up with a proper stable version first.

Selezen · Post by **Selezen** » Wed Jan 07, 2009 9:15 am

Lovely job on those big ships, Simon!

Now, should we call these the "Dream Team" versions of the classics or do i go into competition with Simon...?

wackyman465 · Post by **wackyman465** » Wed Jan 07, 2009 12:04 pm

1.71 is stable enough. There's plenty more "stable" software out the that's buggier than 1.72.1, even.

Simon B · Post by **Simon B** » Wed Jan 07, 2009 12:32 pm

wackyman465 wrote:
1.71 is stable enough. There's plenty more "stable" software out the that's buggier than 1.72.1, even.

This is my thinking, especially considering that Ubuntu users are used to odd stuff.

(checked: the Ubuntu repo version is 1.65-6)

- shall we start a new thread to discuss (further) which is the most recent "stable" version? Thus we can keep this space to discuss sexing up the classic ships.

And with that in mind...
The gauntlet has been thrown to do this with the lot of them. So which ones should be next?

Simon B · Post by **Simon B** » Wed Jan 07, 2009 12:42 pm

Selezen wrote:
Lovely job on those big ships, Simon!

Now, should we call these the "Dream Team" versions of the classics or do I go into competition with Simon...?

Hmmm... a merger?

What I really need is a scripter - though I'll do it if I get there first - for the Boa Skiff. Ahruman has already pointed the way.

JensAyton · Post by **JensAyton** » Wed Jan 07, 2009 6:04 pm

Simon B wrote:
Well oolite seems to invert along the x axis anyway - you are probably just experiencing a faithful conversion.

Oolite seems to use a left-handed coordinate system...

Correct. The current converter scripts take this into account, earlier versions didn’t. (Where are people getting their earlier versions from these days?)

Presumably Dry Dock fails to make this correction when exporting Obj. It’s being rewritten now anyway.

JensAyton · Post by **JensAyton** » Wed Jan 07, 2009 6:07 pm

wackyman465 wrote:
1.71 is stable enough.

No. Oolite is currently not feature-stable, i.e. we are not in a position to guarantee that current features will continue to be supported in future releases. With 1.72, we’re pretty close, though.

Apart from that, there are a bunch of bugs that need fixing. 1.7x is less prone to diverse random crashes than 1.65, but has a lot of wrong behaviours.

Simon B · Post by **Simon B** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 2:39 am

Ahruman wrote:
wackyman465 wrote:
1.71 is stable enough.
No. Oolite is currently not feature-stable

In which case there is no stable version - yet one carries that label.

Apart from that, there are a bunch of bugs that need fixing. 1.7x is less prone to diverse random crashes than 1.65, but has a lot of wrong behaviours.

Which is something else ... I have seen a few things... OT - at some point I'll get round to hunting them down properly.

Commander McLane · Post by **Commander McLane** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 6:26 am

Simon B wrote:
In which case there is no stable version - yet one carries that label.

If you're not happy with the label 'stable', think of it as an 'official release'. The last (and therefore current) official release is 1.65. Everything since has clearly and consistently been marked as 'test releases'.

And there is no debate or discussion needed about that. That's just the facts.

JensAyton · Post by **JensAyton** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 9:44 am

Simon B wrote:
Ahruman wrote:
wackyman465 wrote:
1.71 is stable enough.
No. Oolite is currently not feature-stable
In which case there is no stable version - yet one carries that label.

Not true. The (intentional) features in 1.65 are supposed to be forward-compatible. This is not necessarily the case for test releases. Adding new features that don’t change existing ones does not affect the stability of the old platform.

Any OXP feature that worked in 1.65 but doesn’t work in the current test release is either a bug in the test release, or a bug in the OXP.

Selezen · Post by **Selezen** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 9:48 am

Simon B wrote:
Hmmm... a merger?

What I really need is a scripter - though I'll do it if I get there first - for the Boa Skiff. Ahruman has already pointed the way.

A merger sounds good!

Scripting the Dream Team ships was easy - I just took the script files for the original ships and entered the new model names. I can do the same for the Boa, Anaconda and Python if you like.