Now that this work is up to date with the master, it could be merged too.
I don't see any issues with commits coming to us from the upstream or the way around as we already touched all the files with the headers.
Everything that can be and was sane to encapsulate has been done so.
If in doubt please try forking this and test merge from upstream :)
There are general fixes too, not just namespace specific stuff. Like renaming some of our defines so that they are opentech specific and the missing header guards or at least comments for them. Not forgetting the c-header to c++-header ( -> ) change.
Also I did choose namespace to be BFG:: in order to keep the code fine and dandy in cases we need to use it from outside (like in minizip or cegui parts). It could have been OTE:: too but I thought about using the one for this version in case we have a change to merge some changes from future if ID ever releases another open source version. This can be easily changed too if necessary.
Please have arguments for and against. My sole purpose for this is to isolate the OTE code to it's own namespace in order to split the boarder between it and the standard, and other, libraries.
Now that this work is up to date with the master, it could be merged too.
I don't see any issues with commits coming to us from the upstream or the way around as we already touched all the files with the headers.
Everything that can be and was sane to encapsulate has been done so.
If in doubt please try forking this and test merge from upstream :)
There are general fixes too, not just namespace specific stuff. Like renaming some of our defines so that they are opentech specific and the missing header guards or at least comments for them. Not forgetting the c-header to c++-header ( -> ) change.
Also I did choose namespace to be BFG:: in order to keep the code fine and dandy in cases we need to use it from outside (like in minizip or cegui parts). It could have been OTE:: too but I thought about using the one for this version in case we have a change to merge some changes from future if ID ever releases another open source version. This can be easily changed too if necessary.
Please have arguments for and against. My sole purpose for this is to isolate the OTE code to it's own namespace in order to split the boarder between it and the standard, and other, libraries.