-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 14
Nyx cycle changes #314
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Nyx cycle changes #314
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
there are generally a lot of hard-coded changes that cannot be brought into LSDC because they would change behavior and look for AMX/FMX. please change these areas to enable merging into the main LSDC codebase
To summarize, any changes that look like they would directly interfere with AMX/FMX rastering will not remain because it is not going to be used for the MD2 rastering code. We will likely split the rastering code into a different function to make the call with exporter. Those changes were never ever intended to be brought into master, and were not written to be. |
4c93447
to
ae73fb5
Compare
we have agreed that to expedite the code review process, NYX-specific changes that are will affect AMX/FMX LSDC will be handled following the full approve of NYX for proprietary users. |
None of this looks like it has any impact on data security? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
comment about data security and writing of images for loop_center_xrec()
Please see my comment just below yours - there seems to be only one place where data security could be an issue within this pull request. The comment refers to a new function used to write out images and is implicitly using the current working directory instead of explicitly using the visitDirectory |
* thank you jun for this suggestion
@mskinner5278 do you think you have addressed all of the issues with the pull request that have been brought up? |
Yep, let me know if you want more changes added. |
Co-authored-by: Thomas A Caswell <tcaswell@gmail.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm approving this with reservations.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I am content that any data security issues have been resolved.
This pull request should be reviewed after PR 309.