[opensource-dev] Review Request: Update returnability of objects based on new encroachment rules

Andrew Meadows andrew at lindenlab.com
Wed Dec 22 11:19:49 PST 2010


Merov -

Thanks for the review.  When I got your email this morning I was in
the middle of tracing back those version number changes and fixing
them.  I picked them up in the very first merge of my outstanding
changes, which was just to get my branch up to date before starting
work.  Both parents of that merge were in the log history, so it
isn't clear what happened to the version numbers I picked up.  I guess
they must have been cleared by by another merge down the line.

As to the llregionflags.h changes...

In short: yes these are the changes you want.

The longer story:
The change there reflects the change that has happened in the server
version of that file since the two projects split.  Most of the change
is the cleanup that I did for this project.  On the server side we've
split the "region flags" into "public" (that get used by both the viewer
and server) and "internal" that are only used by the server.  Most of
the lines that were changed or commented out in llregionflags.h was to
to remove unused or "internal" flags.  Otherwise I added a couple new
public flags that communicate the state of the region's "allow return
of encroaching object" feature.


I've fixed things.  Try again from this repo:

http://bitbucket.org/andrew_linden/viewer-development

revision = ba6d29a97383

- Andrew

On 12/22/2010 09:42 AM, Merov Linden wrote:
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/56/
>
>
> Few things I'd like to see fixed before moving to integration:
> llversionserver.h : this change is irrelevant to the issue, take out.
> llversionviewer.h : same
> llregionflags.h	: are all those changes relevant to the issue? I can see the interest of REGION_FLAGS_ALLOW_RETURN_ENCROACHING_OBJECT but what about all the other flags suppressed or commented out? Anything in there changed that shouldn't?
> InfoPlist.strings : don't change that, let release do this when it's necessary to release a version
> Info-SecondLife.plist : same
> viewerRes.rc : same
>
>
> - Merov
>
>
> On December 22nd, 2010, 9:37 a.m., Merov Linden wrote:
>
> Review request for Viewer and Andrew Meadows.
> By Merov Linden.
>
> /Updated 2010-12-22 09:37:08/
>
>
>   Description
>
> The object-vs-parcel overlap test is done by building axis-aligned bounding boxes (AABB) about each prim of the selected objects and then checking for overlap between those boxes and self- and group-owned parcels.
>
> *Bugs: * STORM-807 <http://jira.secondlife.com/browse/STORM-807>
>
>
>   Diffs
>
>     * indra/llcommon/llversionserver.h (fc82190a3f0c)
>     * indra/llcommon/llversionviewer.h (fc82190a3f0c)
>     * indra/llmath/llbbox.h (fc82190a3f0c)
>     * indra/llmath/llbbox.cpp (fc82190a3f0c)
>     * indra/llmessage/llregionflags.h (fc82190a3f0c)
>     * indra/newview/English.lproj/InfoPlist.strings (fc82190a3f0c)
>     * indra/newview/Info-SecondLife.plist (fc82190a3f0c)
>     * indra/newview/llviewermenu.cpp (fc82190a3f0c)
>     * indra/newview/llviewerobject.h (fc82190a3f0c)
>     * indra/newview/llviewerobject.cpp (fc82190a3f0c)
>     * indra/newview/llviewerparceloverlay.h (fc82190a3f0c)
>     * indra/newview/llviewerparceloverlay.cpp (fc82190a3f0c)
>     * indra/newview/llviewerregion.h (fc82190a3f0c)
>     * indra/newview/llviewerregion.cpp (fc82190a3f0c)
>     * indra/newview/res/viewerRes.rc (fc82190a3f0c)
>     * indra/newview/skins/default/xui/en/menu_viewer.xml (fc82190a3f0c)
>
> View Diff <http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/56/diff/>
>


More information about the opensource-dev mailing list