Hello all,
I am currently working at integrating the RLV code into the latest 2.1.2
viewer in "viewer-development". Some users might have noticed that the
"MultipleAttachments" debug setting was set to FALSE by default in order to
stay compatible with 1.x, because 1.x users cannot see attachments
On Thu, 26 Aug 2010 21:45:14 +0200
Marine Kelley wrote:
> I for one would very much like to see the MultipleAttachments debug
> setting come back and stay !
i use multiple attachments, quite all users (but not emerald neither
imprudence) see them correctly, all kirsten viewers (on kirsten is
en
On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 8:53 PM, Altair Sythos wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Aug 2010 21:45:14 +0200
> Marine Kelley wrote:
>
>
>> I for one would very much like to see the MultipleAttachments debug
>> setting come back and stay !
>
> i use multiple attachments, quite all users (but not emerald neither
> i
On Thu, 26 Aug 2010 21:06:53 +0100
Aidan Thornton wrote:
> >> I for one would very much like to see the MultipleAttachments debug
> >> setting come back and stay !
> >
> > i use multiple attachments, quite all users (but not emerald neither
> > imprudence) see them correctly, all kirsten viewers
Trying to confirm the change (and how attachments look/don't look to 1.x
clients), and am finding that in 2.1.2 (298569) multiple attachments just
appears to be broken. I don't see a debug setting, I'm not finding a
preference option, and the feature is definitely not working in-world. Putting
"MultipleAttachments" was a debug setting we were using for testing
multi-attachments internally because we didn't have sufficient UI for
specifying what happened when you went to wear an item on your avatar.
To be clear, the setting "MultipleAttachments" affected the "wear"
option for atta
On Thu, 26 Aug 2010 16:24:08 -0400
Nyx Linden wrote:
> Let me know if this clarifies things.
yeah
i'm on Second Life 2.1.2 (208569) Aug 26 2010 05:22:24 (Second Life
Development) now, it work as you said, just noticed something weird and
tryiong to reproduce:
if i crash when relog all attac
My mistake, then. When I performed the same action to wear an item as
I had in previous builds and got the unexpected/unwanted result, and
saw that the debug option was gone, I thought it had broken (like
anti-aliasing did in the latest build).
When this viewer gets released. it would be helpfu
Correct, that is what most people will do, and that's why we wanted to
keep the behavior of double click / "wear" to be consistent with how the
functionality worked in 1.23.X, as that's what most people are used to
those functions doing.
Since multi-wearables is a new feature, using the new fun
I understand, it makes sense, thanks for your reply Nyx. I did see the Add
option on 2.1.0 along with MultipleAttachments there too so I assumed both
were needed for some reason (this debug setting was used in a few places in
the code).
On 26 August 2010 22:43, Nyx Linden wrote:
> Correct, that
I'd like to chime in and say that this happens to me often as well.
Attachments are worn twice on relog, approx. once a day. Since the
attachments I'm wearing usually say things with llOwnerSay and I see them
say their messages twice, I do know this is not only a viewer-side problem.
I have never o
On 8/26/2010 15:54, Marine Kelley wrote:
> I understand, it makes sense, thanks for your reply Nyx. I did see the
> Add option on 2.1.0 along with MultipleAttachments there too so I
> assumed both were needed for some reason (this debug setting was used
> in a few places in the code).
>
So, M
There were some fixes in 1.42 that dealt with a related MultipleAttachments
issue, and should have addressed the more general case.
If anyone encounters this while logging in with an account where you've
crashed or logged out today or later, would you please follow up with me in
direct email? If y
I think may be more usefull add all you asked in the jira opened about
multiattachments double worn :)
--
Sent by iPhone
Il giorno 27/ago/2010, alle ore 00:50, Brian McGroarty
ha scritto:
There were some fixes in 1.42 that dealt with a related MultipleAttachments
issue, and should have address
The following has been proposed before:
* Add new bits to each object (all existing objects should act as if
all bits are set).
* Give the bits a default meaning (read: human readable word, which
can be different per attachment point),
but allow each user to override those descriptions locally.
You lost quite all good taste of this feature Ppl should be free
to add everything in funny/weird way, and creators cannot be limited
matching which bit another creator use...
The solution is resident side: outfits folders, may be interesting
mark boxes or vendors to create automatically outfi
I fail to see how your example could undermine the bits-proposal.
For a start, the bits *only* add possibilities (254 per object!).
Currently the ONLY existing behavior is as if my bits are already in place, but
set to when you 'wear' something, and to when you 'add'
something. Ad
Maybe i not understand well, now if i want i can wear a collar from a
creator on a shirt made by somebody else, if viewer lock me on a fixed
wearing strutture imho is a pain IF a user want create fast
combination of clothes and attachments without waste time clicking one
per time each item can
x27; rules.
> -Original Message-
> From: opensource-dev-boun...@lists.secondlife.com
> [mailto:opensource-dev-boun...@lists.secondlife.com] On
> Behalf Of Francesco Rabbi
> Sent: 27 August 2010 13:57
> To: Aleric Inglewood
> Cc: opensource-dev
> Subject: R
On 27 August 2010 17:52, Tony Dodd wrote:
> Are we saying it will actually be impossible for a scripter to prevent
> users
> attaching other objects at the same point as the object being scripted? Or
> even detect that another attachment is using the same point? Combat systems
> tend to rely on t
Nyx, I did also notice that if you wear an outfit folder that makes
use of mutliple attachments in v2.1.2, it no longer works properly.
Instead of putting on all the items in the user-specified folder, it
only puts on the first attachment the viewer gets to. Any
additional ones are left un-worn,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 8/27/2010 8:37 AM, Trilo Byte wrote:
> Nyx, I did also notice that if you wear an outfit folder that makes
> use of mutliple attachments in v2.1.2, it no longer works properly.
>
> Instead of putting on all the items in the user-specified folder,
I thought that was the whole point of creating outfit folders to begin with.
Get your avatar looking exactly the way you want, attachments
and all, then save it to a folder for fast/easy/fun one click
wardrobe change. New behavior makes outfit folders decidedly
less fast/easy/fun to work with.
On
Its a bug. We're going to fix it. This isn't the final behavior.
-Nyx
Trilo Byte wrote:
> I thought that was the whole point of creating outfit folders to begin with.
> Get your avatar looking exactly the way you want, attachments
> and all, then save it to a folder for fast/easy/fun one click
>
On Fri, 27 Aug 2010 17:39:38 -0400
Nyx Linden wrote:
> Its a bug. We're going to fix it. This isn't the final behavior.
dunno if related or not, just asking before open a JIRA now in
mouselook i see hair and other face attachments (piercing, cigarette,
hair), is this right?
_
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 8/27/2010 3:03 PM, Altair Sythos Memo wrote:
> dunno if related or not, just asking before open a JIRA now in
> mouselook i see hair and other face attachments (piercing, cigarette,
> hair), is this right?
Me too, I opened a Jira for it; VWR-21
*cough* If the point of this is to make people *want* 2.x a lot of
nice tags that say 'to see me properly, use viewer 2.x... I have more
attachments than you do' might be a good way to go. *cough* Ok, a bit
snarky, but seriously, if we HIDE the COOL stuff, where's the fire to
get people ov
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 8/30/2010 1:39 PM, Suz Dollar wrote:
> If the point of this is to make people *want* 2.x a lot of
> nice tags that say 'to see me properly, use viewer 2.x... I have more
> attachments than you do' might be a good way to go.
It worked for Emer
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 13:44:04 -0700
Kadah wrote:
> > If the point of this is to make people *want* 2.x a lot of
> > nice tags that say 'to see me properly, use viewer 2.x... I have
> > more attachments than you do' might be a good way to go.
>
> It worked for Emerald.
Emerald use a "tweaked
The way emerald works and others is no good solution couse as you sayd you
can only see it with those viewers AND it dosent even work for hud objects,
how viewer 2 works now is it do works accross all viewers AND it works for
hud objects
and as for the radar thing, Kristens viewer already added
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 23:15:17 +0200
"Alexandrea Fride" wrote:
> The way emerald works and others is no good solution couse as you
> sayd you can only see it with those viewers AND it dosent even work
> for hud objects,
>
> how viewer 2 works now is it do works accross all viewers AND it
> works f
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 8/30/2010 2:04 PM, Altair Sythos Memo wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 13:44:04 -0700
> Kadah wrote:
>
>>> If the point of this is to make people *want* 2.x a lot of
>>> nice tags that say 'to see me properly, use viewer 2.x... I have
>>> more at
On 8/30/2010 3:04 PM, Altair Sythos Memo wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 13:44:04 -0700
> Kadah wrote:
>
>>> If the point of this is to make people *want* 2.x a lot of
>>> nice tags that say 'to see me properly, use viewer 2.x... I have
>>> more attachments than you do' might be a good way to g
On 8/30/2010 19:38, David Couchenour wrote
> Someone can edit and add the additional attachment points to the
> avatar_lad.xml file for the other viewer(s). I've done this for the
> 2.1.2 viewer and it seems to work. Note that you can't simply copy the
> avatar_lad.xml from Emerald to 2.x.
>
> Th
On 2010-08-30, at 15:39, Suz Dollar wrote:
> *cough* If the point of this is to make people *want* 2.x a lot of
> nice tags that say 'to see me properly, use viewer 2.x... I have more
> attachments than you do' might be a good way to go.
If I can't talk without jumping I'm not going to go to
Il giorno 31/ago/2010, alle ore 12:11, Argent Stonecutter
ha scritto:
> On 2010-08-30, at 15:39, Suz Dollar wrote:
>> *cough* If the point of this is to make people *want* 2.x a lot of
>> nice tags that say 'to see me properly, use viewer 2.x... I have more
>> attachments than you do' might b
On Tuesday 31 August 2010 12:24:31 Francesco Rabbi wrote:
> Il giorno 31/ago/2010, alle ore 12:11, Argent Stonecutter
>
> ha scritto:
> > On 2010-08-30, at 15:39, Suz Dollar wrote:
> >> *cough* If the point of this is to make people *want* 2.x a lot of
> >> nice tags that say 'to see me prope
Been over that and over that on the list. The only way to get that taken
care of is to fix it ourselves and have LL merge it in. I'd do it if I
were 'up to the task' but anyone who does do it just needs to remember
to have it set up as a pref setting.
Gamers like it broken like it is now, people w
On 2010-08-31, at 22:40, Glen Canaday wrote:
> Gamers like it broken like it is now, people who SOCIALIZE here (since
> SL is, in fact, *not* a game... ahem) like it broken the way it's
> historically been.
It wasn't broken historically: it was a prefs setting.
Also, gamers don't like it the way
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 9/1/2010 4:09 AM, Argent Stonecutter wrote:
> It wasn't broken historically: it was a prefs setting.
>
> Also, gamers don't like it the way it is, seems like they want to completely
> lose the chat bar on hitting enter:
>
> http://jira.secondlife
On Wed, 01 Sep 2010 13:46:10 -0700
Kadah wrote:
> I prefer WASD movement, but the current method has a lot of focus
> control issues where enter doesn't always bring focus to the chat bar.
> I'm having to use the mouse all the time to do this.
I htink is better give as option to residents, a lo
People on this list got pretty vitriolic about it only a few months ago
- I was under the impression the gamers wanted it the way it is.
Where was this ever a pref setting? I don't recall ever seeing it.
--GC
On Wed, 2010-09-01 at 06:09 -0500, Argent Stonecutter wrote:
> On 2010-08-31, at 22:40,
This is fixed internally in the ECC project branch. Once that merges
into viewer-development (we have the same submission process for merging
as you guys do!), I'll post here to ask everyone to test out the fix.
Thanks!
-Nyx
Nyx Linden wrote:
> Its a bug. We're going to fix it. This isn't the
43 matches
Mail list logo
