| 01:00.10 | *** join/#brlcad mohitdhingras (~root@14.139.128.12) |
| 01:32.05 | starseeker | crdueck: feel free to experiment |
| 02:10.22 | *** part/#brlcad louipc (~louipc@archlinux/fellow/louipc) |
| 02:24.02 | starseeker | crdueck: we have to carefully manage search paths when specifying 32 vs 64 bit building, since CMake's default search routines don't check to make sure a library found is built for the correct word size |
| 02:49.33 | starseeker | on most of the systems I have tested to date, 64 bit libs went into lib64 - if we have lib32 32 bit, lib64 64 bit, and lib uncertain there is a mess to resolve |
| 03:01.47 | crdueck | starseeker: i asked in my distro's channel and the ambiguity is because 32-bit support was implemented as an afterthought, and so the default is 64-bit. the file path problem would very likely only affect archlinux users |
| 03:46.01 | *** join/#brlcad abhi2011 (~chatzilla@209.201.113.2) |
| 03:54.51 | *** join/#brlcad dtidrow (~dtidrow@c-68-84-167-135.hsd1.mi.comcast.net) |
| 04:57.08 | *** join/#brlcad jordisayol (~jordisayo@unaffiliated/jordisayol) |
| 05:05.16 | *** join/#brlcad jordisayol1 (~jordisayo@188.119.210.222.dynamic.eurona.net) |
| 05:05.17 | *** join/#brlcad jordisayol (~jordisayo@unaffiliated/jordisayol) |
| 05:07.45 | *** join/#brlcad jordisayol (~jordisayo@unaffiliated/jordisayol) |
| 05:10.01 | *** join/#brlcad jordisayol (~jordisayo@unaffiliated/jordisayol) |
| 05:19.36 | *** join/#brlcad jordisayol (~jordisayo@unaffiliated/jordisayol) |
| 05:30.43 | *** join/#brlcad jordisayol (~jordisayo@unaffiliated/jordisayol) |
| 05:48.09 | *** join/#brlcad abhi2011 (~chatzilla@209.201.113.2) |
| 06:09.29 | *** join/#brlcad d_rossberg (~rossberg@BZ.BZFLAG.BZ) |
| 06:31.52 | *** join/#brlcad pawleeq (~pawleeq@core1.humlnet.cz) |
| 08:05.08 | *** join/#brlcad stas (~stas@82.208.133.12) |
| 09:04.06 | *** join/#brlcad kane_ (~Mesut@dslb-084-063-241-201.pools.arcor-ip.net) |
| 10:38.03 | *** join/#brlcad jordisayol (~jordisayo@188.119.210.222.dynamic.eurona.net) |
| 10:38.06 | *** join/#brlcad jordisayol (~jordisayo@unaffiliated/jordisayol) |
| 10:57.36 | *** part/#brlcad mohitdhingras (~root@14.139.128.12) |
| 10:59.42 | *** join/#brlcad Jak_o_Shadows (~Fake@unaffiliated/jak-o-shadows/x-0479135) |
| 11:51.05 | *** join/#brlcad kane__ (~Mesut@dslb-088-078-198-057.pools.arcor-ip.net) |
| 11:56.09 | *** join/#brlcad kane_ (~Mesut@dslb-088-078-198-057.pools.arcor-ip.net) |
| 13:08.19 | ``Erik | starseeker: 3 off by many on solids |
| 13:08.36 | starseeker | otherwise it builds? |
| 13:09.02 | ``Erik | um, with everything bundled, it still flipped out about finding the macports png.h, so I turned strict off and it built |
| 13:09.05 | starseeker | (make -k I think should proceed with running the rest of 'em...) |
| 13:09.17 | starseeker | oh, right - you also need to add... letsee... |
| 13:09.53 | starseeker | -DCMAKE_SEARCH_OSX_PATHS=SYSTEM |
| 13:16.54 | ``Erik | still seems to pull the macports png.h |
| 13:17.17 | starseeker | growl. |
| 13:17.42 | starseeker | ok, nevermind - may need some of the improvements in trunk to avoid that issue |
| 13:58.13 | ``Erik | only regress issues are the old 3 off by many solids and 'gui' in mged |
| 14:00.15 | starseeker | O.o |
| 14:00.19 | starseeker | what's up with gui? |
| 14:08.19 | CIA-128 | BRL-CAD: 03starseeker * r50367 10/brlcad/branches/STABLE/CMakeLists.txt: Correct typo. |
| 14:09.16 | ``Erik | looks like a lib mismatch, X from macports vs GL from system |
| 14:09.48 | starseeker | oh, right |
| 14:10.01 | starseeker | ok, that's specific to the macports |
| 14:10.07 | starseeker | tries on his non-macports mac |
| 14:10.15 | ``Erik | does that commit allow total exclusion of macports shtuff? |
| 14:10.34 | starseeker | which, 50367? |
| 14:10.41 | starseeker | that's just a Windows thing |
| 14:10.58 | starseeker | ignoring all macports stuff requires include dir order sorting |
| 14:35.44 | CIA-128 | BRL-CAD: 03starseeker * r50368 10/brlcad/branches/STABLE/src/other/CMakeLists.txt: Don't use numbers for bools |
| 15:06.36 | CIA-128 | BRL-CAD: 03starseeker * r50369 10/brlcad/branches/STABLE/src/other/step/src/express/ (CMakeLists.txt expprint.c): Remove this file - removed in trunk, not needed, causing build issue on mac for release build. |
| 15:10.48 | CIA-128 | BRL-CAD: 03starseeker * r50370 10/brlcad/branches/STABLE/src/other/libz/CMakeLists.txt: Add workaround for MSVC2010 64 bit and zlib from trunk r49887 |
| 15:12.08 | ``Erik | building system X instead of macports fixes that mged gui issue |
| 17:12.15 | *** join/#brlcad jordisayol (~jordisayo@unaffiliated/jordisayol) |
| 17:22.01 | kanzure | decided to take a break on nurbs :p |
| 17:22.03 | kanzure | http://heybryan.org/shots/2012-04-30-1131-nanoengineer-chroot.png |
| 17:33.23 | *** join/#brlcad milamber1 (~devlin@d118-75-244-176.try.wideopenwest.com) |
| 17:48.11 | *** join/#brlcad milamber (~devlin@d118-75-244-176.try.wideopenwest.com) |
| 17:50.13 | *** join/#brlcad milamber1 (~devlin@d118-75-244-176.try.wideopenwest.com) |
| 18:00.19 | CIA-128 | BRL-CAD: 03starseeker * r50371 10/brlcad/trunk/misc/CMake/FindX11.cmake: Tweak search paths for X11 |
| 18:00.58 | starseeker | crdueck: Does r50371 help on archlinux? |
| 18:07.58 | brlcad | kanzure: nifty -- you ever attend the molecular modeling BoF? |
| 18:08.06 | kanzure | BoF? |
| 18:08.21 | brlcad | birds of a feather, at a conference |
| 18:08.26 | brlcad | siggraph for example |
| 18:08.28 | kanzure | hrm. never heard of it |
| 18:08.32 | kanzure | nope have't been to siggraph |
| 18:08.42 | kanzure | http://github.com/kanzure/nanoengineer#readme |
| 18:12.05 | brlcad | love the animations |
| 18:12.28 | kanzure | downside: this code base suffers from bit rot |
| 18:12.44 | kanzure | the last known working distro to run it was ubuntu 7.04 |
| 18:12.58 | kanzure | soo i created a chroot .tar.gz http://groups.google.com/group/nanoengineer-dev/browse_thread/thread/48a3fa9291f81f41 |
| 18:13.13 | kanzure | now i guess i need to start upgrading to successive ubuntu versions, run the tests and fix bugs |
| 18:17.59 | brlcad | it's not easy to write code that specific that cannot be trivially updated.. ;) |
| 18:18.33 | kanzure | huh? |
| 18:18.54 | kanzure | i think you mean "it's not easy to write code that specicfic that *can* be trivially upgraded" |
| 18:18.57 | kanzure | *speciic |
| 18:19.00 | kanzure | *specific jeeze |
| 18:19.46 | kanzure | or "it's easy to write specific code that cannot be trivially updated" |
| 18:30.53 | crdueck | starseeker: r50371 finds the correct libraries and builds fine now |
| 18:39.35 | starseeker | crdueck: awesome |
| 18:40.43 | kanzure | starseeker: hihi |
| 18:47.03 | starseeker | kanzure: howdy |
| 18:47.17 | starseeker | kanzure: gave up on NURBS for a while eh? |
| 18:50.45 | CIA-128 | BRL-CAD: 03starseeker * r50372 10/brlcad/trunk/misc/CMake/FindX11.cmake: Note that archlinux prompted the tweak to X11 search paths. |
| 18:51.29 | kanzure | starseeker: heh well not really. just doing other things |
| 18:54.49 | starseeker | nanoengineer looked cool, but would have taken quite a lot of work to polish up iirc |
| 18:57.30 | starseeker | would be awesome to see someone bring it back to life |
| 18:57.48 | starseeker | it was/is GPL? |
| 19:01.55 | brlcad | kanzure: actually, I meant the opposite .. :) |
| 19:02.32 | kanzure | starseeker: gpl 2 and gpl 3 (wtf?) |
| 19:02.33 | brlcad | I can usually get code to compile on linux I wrote 10 years ago in just a few minutes (on ANY distro) |
| 19:02.45 | kanzure | brlcad: i would greatly appreciate your help, then |
| 19:02.46 | brlcad | the harder ports are to a different OS |
| 19:02.55 | kanzure | again, i made a chroot to get it running from the original packages |
| 19:02.59 | kanzure | but i would love for it to work on modern systems |
| 19:03.10 | kanzure | then i can package up a .deb or something |
| 19:03.36 | brlcad | what's the history of that code, you write most of it? |
| 19:03.56 | kanzure | nope |
| 19:04.06 | kanzure | mark sims founded nanorex inc. 2004-2009 |
| 19:04.12 | kanzure | dumped about a million/year on 10 developers |
| 19:04.27 | kanzure | v1.0.0 released march 2008, v1.0.1 the following month |
| 19:04.36 | kanzure | v1.1.1 is the current release |
| 19:05.40 | kanzure | in 2010 mark gave me the source codde |
| 19:05.47 | kanzure | well, he gave me the repository i mean |
| 19:05.58 | kanzure | and i converted from cvs->svn->git and preserved the history |
| 19:07.07 | brlcad | hm, gplv2+, shame.. :/ |
| 19:07.08 | CIA-128 | BRL-CAD: 03starseeker * r50373 10/brlcad/branches/STABLE/ChangeLog: Tack on the other changes to ChangeLog |
| 19:07.28 | kanzure | brlcad: technically, nanorex can relicense this code base |
| 19:07.34 | kanzure | and mark is still around.. Mark Sims <mark@nanorex.com> |
| 19:09.00 | starseeker | kanzure: that'd probably be essential before we could do much of anything with it... |
| 19:09.27 | kanzure | mark is really nice and obviously an awesome person for even making this open source |
| 19:09.55 | kanzure | so if you want to put some effort into getting it licensed more appropriately, i'd be willing to help out |
| 19:10.47 | starseeker | brlcad: what do you think? any chance molecular engineering capabilities would be of interest to BRL-CAD? |
| 19:11.20 | kanzure | heh |
| 19:12.04 | kanzure | modularizing nanoengineer and breaking it up into stuff that brlcad could cannibalize would be a great outcome, in my opinion |
| 19:12.05 | brlcad | there's a reason I've attended nearly every molecular engineering bof at siggraph .. it's on the very fringe of our domain but a philosphical fit |
| 19:12.53 | kanzure | (there are already modules, but i mean "releasable" modules or "separable" modules) |
| 19:13.30 | brlcad | I'd love to get to the point where I can model something at a macroscopic scale, but then keep zooming in to see/modify underlying molecular structure |
| 19:13.56 | kanzure | the data structures for that would be a bit wonky |
| 19:14.01 | brlcad | csg lends itself very well for compactness of representation that would be needed |
| 19:14.11 | kanzure | there's no reason you need to have precise atomic definition of your curve.. but at the same time, it's not an infinite curve either |
| 19:14.46 | brlcad | I'm more interested from a materials science perspective |
| 19:15.17 | brlcad | create a metal plate for example and simulate it getting cracked |
| 19:15.34 | brlcad | now change the molecular structure to a different configuration, what's the effect? |
| 19:16.31 | brlcad | could compare different alloys, represent non-homogenous regions (like bone), accurate anatomical modeling |
| 19:17.34 | kanzure | ah i see, sure |
| 19:17.46 | kanzure | most of nanoengineer uses pdb files |
| 19:17.53 | kanzure | so you can import basically any molecule from pubchem or ncbi |
| 19:18.11 | brlcad | nods |
| 19:18.15 | starseeker | kanzure: is nanorex (the company) still active? That may be a factor in whether they'd consider non-GPL licensing - a fair number of companies use GPL because it preserves (practically speaking) the possibility of also selling commercial licensing for a fee |
| 19:18.15 | kanzure | one of the features on the wishlist is the ability to model large systems like those in the concept video: |
| 19:18.23 | kanzure | http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vEYN18d7gHg |
| 19:18.36 | brlcad | I started on a pdb-g a few years ago, but didn't finish it in my afternoon playing around |
| 19:18.37 | kanzure | starseeker: the company is not active, but mark has been paying the hosting bills so the sites are still up |
| 19:20.36 | starseeker | well... the most straightforward way would be for someone to email and ask... |
| 19:21.12 | kanzure | sure |
| 19:22.19 | starseeker | brlcad: you want to, or should I? |
| 19:22.22 | kanzure | i wonder how large-scale molecular machines would be modeled.. storing atom positions for everything is unwise |
| 19:22.41 | kanzure | starseeker: if you or brlcad choose to send that email, can you email me a draft first? Bryan Bishop <kanzure@gmail.com> |
| 19:23.07 | starseeker | kanzure: I assume you prefer one of us to ask instead of doing so yourself? |
| 19:24.01 | kanzure | uhh, i am still sorting through my feelings haha |
| 19:24.10 | starseeker | heh |
| 19:24.14 | kanzure | i really wanted to get nanoengineer working on modern distros before i pinged mark again |
| 19:24.47 | starseeker | ah - have some concrete benefits in hand? |
| 19:25.01 | brlcad | a tit for tat is in order, have something to show what the value is |
| 19:25.10 | kanzure | yeah.. so far the majority of the work i have done is converting old cvs/svn repos to git |
| 19:25.25 | brlcad | maybe starseeker you could give the compile a go on gentoo |
| 19:25.32 | starseeker | nods |
| 19:25.43 | starseeker | that'd be the best place for sure, for something like this |
| 19:26.05 | starseeker | I tried once some time ago, but don't recall now what the issues were |
| 19:26.05 | brlcad | if it compiles/compiled on ubuntu, should just be build system issues, dependencies, minor code assumptions |
| 19:26.31 | starseeker | kanzure: what GUI library does it use? |
| 19:26.37 | kanzure | pyqt 4.3.3 |
| 19:26.41 | brlcad | I can probably give it a go in a week or two |
| 19:26.52 | kanzure | here is how i built the ubuntu chroot |
| 19:26.52 | kanzure | http://diyhpl.us/~bryan/irc/nanoengineer/nanoengineer-chroot-debootstrap |
| 19:27.01 | kanzure | or you can download it in the parent directory |
| 19:27.04 | starseeker | I'll take a quick wack at it tonight and see how it looks |
| 19:27.08 | kanzure | coolio |
| 19:27.33 | starseeker | kanzure: fair warning - if I get serious about it the build system's converting to CMake :-) |
| 19:27.45 | kanzure | aww but the build system actually /works/ |
| 19:27.53 | kanzure | this is the one part of it that is functioning :P |
| 19:28.01 | starseeker | on MSVC too? |
| 19:28.11 | kanzure | uh good question, i don't have that environment setup for testing at all |
| 19:29.43 | starseeker | a working build system is actually the best starting point |
| 19:30.20 | kanzure | there are also some unit tests |
| 19:31.52 | starseeker | hasn't tangled with pyqt for a while... |
| 19:32.18 | starseeker | remember glancing at what they were doing to make that linkage work and going a bit pale |
| 19:33.01 | starseeker | ah, crud |
| 19:33.16 | starseeker | now I remember - PyQt is GPL |
| 19:33.31 | starseeker | nuts |
| 19:34.20 | starseeker | speaking of software that likes to preserve licensing opportunities... |
| 19:34.40 | starseeker | kanzure: how heavily is the nanoengineer code invested in PyQt? |
| 19:35.28 | kanzure | i don't know what to tell you |
| 19:36.03 | kanzure | there's lots of code that relies on it in cad/src/ |
| 19:36.22 | starseeker | nods - it's a tough question to answer without digging |
| 19:36.31 | starseeker | didn't know how far into the code you had gotten |
| 19:36.49 | kanzure | i have poked around a bit but i'm not ready to delete or rewrite large portions :) |
| 19:37.15 | starseeker | nods - it's stuck at GPL then unless/until it looks viable to not rely on PyQt |
| 19:38.51 | starseeker | looks like PySide is the LGPL alternative, but I have no idea how comparable the two are |
| 19:39.38 | starseeker | cross platform looks a bit iffy... |
| 19:39.50 | kanzure | holy crap what the hell is cad/src/platform_dependent/gpl_only.py |
| 19:39.58 | kanzure | the message is menacing |
| 19:40.42 | kanzure | ah it might have been qt3 leftovers |
| 19:40.59 | kanzure | "Here are those functions we can't allow Qt3 Windows users to run:" |
| 19:41.55 | starseeker | yeah, back in the day (IIRC) Windows Qt was even more restricted than other platforms |
| 19:42.03 | kanzure | libpython23.a.gz and libpython24.a.gz in the repo.. not cool |
| 19:42.53 | starseeker | yeah, PyQt is probably the biggest GPL anchor |
| 19:43.00 | starseeker | heh - ouch |
| 19:43.55 | starseeker | PyQt is like SISL - they have a good sound reason not to ever go LGPL |
| 19:44.25 | CIA-128 | BRL-CAD: 03starseeker * r50374 10/brlcad/tags/rel-7-20-6/: Tag 7.20.6 |
| 19:46.09 | starseeker | kanzure: hmm - http://qt-project.org/wiki/Differences_Between_PySide_and_PyQt |
| 19:47.06 | kanzure | that doesn't look too horrible |
| 19:47.26 | kanzure | "Supporting Both APIs" now that's neat.. |
| 19:47.44 | kanzure | https://github.com/epage/PythonUtils/blob/master/util/qt_compat.py |
| 19:47.51 | kanzure | "qt_compat.py [github.com] is an example of centralizing the knowledge of PySide and PyQt without using monkey-patching. It serves both to point out what differences exist as well as keeping your code binding-agnostic." |
| 19:47.58 | kanzure | "This is important for when needing to support both bindings, usually when transitioning from one to the other and needing to continue to support older distributions that do not yet come with PySide." |
| 19:48.15 | kanzure | starseeker: the other issue is that i would really like to make sure i get contributor license agreements |
| 19:48.28 | starseeker | hmm? |
| 19:48.41 | starseeker | in what sense? |
| 19:48.42 | kanzure | there is lots and lots of value with making sure someone actually owns the copyright of this, even if it's an organization somewhere |
| 19:48.53 | kanzure | well for instane, all apache contributors sign documents before their code is accepted |
| 19:49.12 | starseeker | yeah, and it's one of the major hurdles to contributing to Apache projects |
| 19:49.40 | starseeker | I don't think even Qt itself requires that... |
| 19:49.52 | kanzure | really? how does trolltech keep the licensing straight |
| 19:50.59 | starseeker | hmm... I guess they do, actually - they just don't require copyright assignment |
| 19:51.04 | starseeker | http://qt-project.org/legal.html |
| 19:51.06 | kanzure | fascinating. |
| 19:51.26 | kanzure | *instance |
| 19:53.44 | starseeker | kanzure: to be honest, I doubt I'd bother with a setup that requires a contributor agreement under normal circumstances, particularly when copyright assignment is required - there are too many interesting things to work on that don't require the hoop jumping |
| 19:54.23 | kanzure | yeah, i could be convinced to agree with that pretty easily |
| 19:54.49 | starseeker | kanzure: brlcad would have more insight on the fine points of our own setup |
| 19:58.12 | starseeker | oh, here it is - "Authors and other BRL-CAD contributors must comply with the copyright |
| 19:58.15 | starseeker | terms for their respective contributions unless otherwise noted or |
| 19:58.18 | starseeker | arranged. This includes an implicit assignment of copyright for any |
| 19:58.20 | starseeker | and all contributions being made." |
| 19:59.03 | kanzure | hey if that's good enough for the legal experts in the military.. then it's good enough for me |
| 19:59.25 | starseeker | kanzure: again, better to ask brlcad about all that - he was there :-) It was before my time |
| 19:59.45 | starseeker | was just looking at our own COPYING file |
| 20:03.01 | brlcad | for most matters of rights management, it's more an issue of what your goals are -- whether you're more interested in growing your community or protecting your asset(s) |
| 20:04.14 | brlcad | no protection is foolproof, there's always legal risk so it's really about levels of risk assessment and cost |
| 20:05.50 | brlcad | of course explicit copyright assignment is better for a litigeous perspective than implicit assignment, that's intuitive but then there's a cost associated |
| 20:06.37 | brlcad | explicit assignment via forms will invariably reduce contributions from the global pool of candidate contributors |
| 20:07.18 | brlcad | if reaching the most contributors were your only goal, no assignment would fit just fine |
| 20:08.24 | brlcad | if protecting your already-widely-popular asset (e.g., apache) was the most important, go for the forms |
| 20:09.46 | kanzure | right, i suppose so |
| 20:09.54 | kanzure | i don't have a strong opinion either way on nanoengineer |
| 20:09.54 | brlcad | we're in the middle willing to take on a little risk, protecting our assets but encoruaging contributors |
| 20:10.18 | brlcad | yeah, someone might argue that they never explicitly agreed to our terms even though we usually have an audit trail, but then our response can always be to yank their contributions entirely |
| 20:10.23 | brlcad | no code is sacred ;) |
| 20:10.37 | starseeker | kanzure: you mentioned "lots and lots of value" earlier - what did you have in mind there? |
| 20:11.06 | brlcad | then the only risk is *their* contributions causing financial harm, which is incredibly hard to demonstrate with open source not being sold for a profit |
| 20:11.25 | kanzure | starseeker: a managing organization can do more if it knows its permissions |
| 20:12.13 | brlcad | that's a problem of documentation |
| 20:12.21 | brlcad | it should be stated very clearly (and explicitly) |
| 20:12.42 | brlcad | and reiterated in dialog so you have audit |
| 20:21.41 | starseeker | kanzure: "do more" - do *what* more? Did you have something specific in mind? |
| 20:22.43 | kanzure | nope :) |
| 20:23.13 | kanzure | i guess people worry about companies like nanorex owning their contributions, and then making money on their "open source" work |
| 20:23.28 | kanzure | i mean, asymmetrically |
| 20:23.32 | brlcad | it's all about being sued or wanting to sue |
| 20:23.48 | kanzure | if it was bsd, then anyone would be able to setup a similar operation |
| 20:23.51 | kanzure | etc. etc. |
| 20:24.10 | brlcad | and would you *really* care |
| 20:24.18 | brlcad | and would that harm you |
| 20:25.12 | kanzure | stop asking hard questions! |
| 20:25.15 | kanzure | haha |
| 20:25.51 | starseeker | kanzure: Oddly enough, you can find a few instances where the Modified BSD/MIT style licenses actually end up getting more commercial support, because companies aren't scared of using the code |
| 20:26.15 | starseeker | clang/llvm being one of the more recent large scale instances - webkit is another |
| 20:26.45 | brlcad | what could someone do to your contribution/code/creation/whatever that might cause you to sue them for damages -- if you would very unlikely take the efforts to sue, then you only have to be concerned with others suing you |
| 20:28.56 | kanzure | starseeker: yep, i'm aware and see why that happens |
| 20:43.45 | *** join/#brlcad DarkCalf (DC@173.231.40.98) |
| 20:48.19 | starseeker | kanzure: generally speaking, grabbing BSD code and closing it up is helpful to an organization only when they can't share improvements to the original code without exposing trade secrets or "giving the competition a leg up", so to speak. There *are* instances where those concerns are legitimate, but any company parting ways with the original codebase is taking the full burden of supporting that code |
| 20:49.26 | starseeker | internal forks of that nature have a nasty tendency to diverge from the original code base, and subsequent integrations get progressively more difficult if there is no code sharing going on |
| 20:49.49 | starseeker | all of which is non-revenue-generating work for the company |
| 20:51.06 | kanzure | opencascade recently released their own "community version" git repo.. it's pretty funny |
| 20:51.10 | kanzure | it has no revision history really |
| 20:51.17 | kanzure | i guess they were scared about oce.git |
| 20:51.52 | starseeker | yeah, I remember seeing that. They also want forms signed from contributors, and the oce crowd didn't react well to the idea |
| 20:52.12 | starseeker | they also balked (again) at the notion of using a standard license |
| 20:54.25 | starseeker | shrugs - we'll just keep going our own way. Personally I'd be much more inclined to pick apart Ayam and Varkon than opencascade |
| 20:54.43 | kanzure | yeah, i tried picking apart opencascade and it's not worth it, <standard rant goes here> |
| 20:55.39 | starseeker | brlcad figured that out a long time ago - I took a bit longer (ooo, shiny pictures) but figured it out eventually |
| 20:56.55 | starseeker | The FreeCAD guys are welcome to it - personally I hope they succeed - compeition/alternatives are always a good thing |
| 21:21.30 | kanzure | something is fundamentally very wrong with opencascade if *none* of their programmers have the chops to prevent code massacre on their scale |
| 21:31.33 | *** join/#brlcad stas (~stas@188.24.35.114) |
| 22:29.19 | *** join/#brlcad andrei_ (~andrei@188.25.159.184) |
| 22:31.15 | *** join/#brlcad crdueck_ (~cdk@d173-238-127-19.home4.cgocable.net) |
| 22:32.51 | *** join/#brlcad crdueck__ (~cdk@d173-238-127-19.home4.cgocable.net) |
| 22:35.25 | *** join/#brlcad crdueck (~cdk@d173-238-127-19.home4.cgocable.net) |
| 22:36.16 | *** join/#brlcad juanman (~quassel@unaffiliated/juanman) |
| 23:32.40 | *** join/#brlcad crdueck_ (~cdk@d173-238-127-19.home4.cgocable.net) |
| 23:32.59 | *** join/#brlcad crdueck (~cdk@d173-238-127-19.home4.cgocable.net) |
| 23:37.37 | *** join/#brlcad DarkCalf (~DC@173.231.40.98) |
| 23:45.24 | starseeker | wow nanoengineer is a big repo - looks like you really did preserve the history :-) |
| 23:47.40 | kanzure | yes :) |
| 23:47.44 | kanzure | that was very important to me |
| 23:48.09 | kanzure | however.. there's also some random large binary files in there that i forgot to remove before everyone cloned |
| 23:48.19 | starseeker | winces |
| 23:48.41 | starseeker | yeah... might be worth redoing it without those, if that's practical |
| 23:48.59 | kanzure | everyone would have to update their git repos |
| 23:53.00 | starseeker | kanzure: might be worth it? |
| 23:53.18 | starseeker | otherwise we're stuck with this huge download forevermore |
| 23:58.12 | kanzure | hrmmmm |
| 23:58.13 | *** join/#brlcad juanman (~quassel@unaffiliated/juanman) |
| 23:58.35 | kanzure | starseeker: well let's look at how much space would be cleared up exactly |
| 23:59.21 | kanzure | find . | grep gz |
| 23:59.26 | kanzure | these are all 40 kilobyte files |
| 23:59.41 | kanzure | cad/src/ is 42 MB |
