Am 17.08.2014 10:47, schrieb James Holsenback:

>> If I understand you correctly, you're saying that with issue #29 fixes
>> in place commit 7502593 works while cf1c3fb doesn't. Is that right?
>
> ac564f7 was the last time I was able to compile and run OTOTest file
> correctly ... cf1c3fb wouldn't even compile. jumped to af80da4 (the last
> issue #29) commit and it compiled fine but OTOTest file problem showed
> up again

Please note that the Git version history isn't linear: It has different 
branches that split and merge; and while ac564f7 is the last commit 
before cf1c3fb, it was done on a different branch, and so the immediate 
predecessor of cf1c3fb is the earlier commit 7502593. (Likewise, the 
later commit 914fff1 is a direct successor of ac564f7 but not of 
cf1c3fb, and is therefore likely to both compile and run OTOTest file.)

The following commits are still suspects for having broken OTOTest (in 
reverse chronological order):

     cf1c3fb
     7502593
     2a2d1a8
     2a41f04

7502593 is comparatively unlikely to be the culprit, as it just merges 
bugfix cc24c62, which was also merged into the other branch leading to 
ac564f7 and apparently didn't do any damage there.

2a2d1a8 is about as hot a candidate as cf1c3fb - probably even more so, 
as it is all about vectors and therefore relative position of items, 
while cf1c3fb is about blend maps (colour maps, pigment maps, normal 
maps etc.), which do not have any intrinsic relative positional 
component to them.

2a41f04 is a hot candidate for having caused GitHub issue #29, but 
shouldn't have brought about any functional changes, so I suspect it 
will run fine with the issue #29 fixes applied.

Post a reply to this message