Closed illwieckz closed 6 years ago
So I'm looking for answers to this very simple question:
What is it?
To which q3map2 tree was this originally checked in to? When, in what context, for what game?
Oh I see the other pull requests. Makes more sense now.
It was a code sitting in an older GtkRadiant branch by @neumond providing enhancements and fixes for Unvanquished game support. So this code was targetting the GtkRadiant's master branch at this time, and the GtkRadiant default q3map2 tree (not the UrT one).
Edit: So yes, I've split his branch to make PR #533 and #535, and after the split this commit was left alone. I thought it would be a bad idea to drop it without starting a talk about it first.
I ping some NetRadiant guys and Unvanquished guys involved in Unvanquished mapping in case of one of them would knows something about it, or would at least understands it.
So, @TimePath, @mbasaglia, @IngarKCT, @Viech, this code was written by @neumond while he was working on adding Unvanquished support to GtkRadiant and q3map2 some years ago. This code does not seems to come from NetRadiant, and it does not looks like a fix imported from elsewhere, but it looks like something written especially with Unvanquished in mind. Have you any idea about the purpose of this commit and if this could be needed, and in which case? :no_mouth:
To not let it fall into oblivion:
<MateosEDK>
illwieckz: isn't that code made to avoid generating radiosity for dynamic lights?<MateosEDK>
since they're dynamic, they shouldn't be taken into account for static lighting on light maps<TTimo>
yeah that's what that patch looked like, it'll probably be fine to merge in
Radiosity refers to q3map2 tracing light from light emitting surfaces and light entities onto the lightmaps shipped with maps. I suppose that noradiosity
refers to having q3map2 ignore (and not remove, with keeligths
) the light entity in question such that Dæmon can use it to cast light dynamically.
seems safe enough, pulling it in, thanks!
This is an old commit by @neumond. In fact I don't know what it is supposed to fix. By the way if someone understands both the issue and the fix and is able to tell the fix is legit, it would be a shame to forget that old commit, hence that PR.