Skip to content

Conversation

@Argmaster
Copy link
Collaborator

@Argmaster Argmaster commented May 2, 2025

I still need more variants of lushy branches, also the average branch variants seem a bit bare, too bare IMO, tho maybe these are things we could tweak later?

Screenshot 2025-06-02 000603
Screenshot 2025-06-02 000620
Screenshot 2025-06-02 000636

@Argmaster Argmaster force-pushed the feature/coniferous branch from af6ff15 to 666e58d Compare May 2, 2025 14:20
@ikabod-kee
Copy link
Collaborator

But honestly working on this without #1337 #1356 and #1244 was a real pain.
You get the struggle now XD

@Argmaster
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Yee, I will do my best to fix everything that comes up in reviews asap, but without reviews we won't merge this C:

@Argmaster
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Argmaster commented May 11, 2025

Todo: use leafless branches for branches, so to reduce flatness of the branches when looking from the bottom

@Argmaster
Copy link
Collaborator Author

image

image

image

image

image

@Argmaster Argmaster marked this pull request as ready for review June 1, 2025 23:16
@Argmaster Argmaster marked this pull request as draft June 4, 2025 21:04
@Argmaster
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@ikabod-kee I summon you! Speak now or forever hold your peace!

@Argmaster Argmaster marked this pull request as ready for review June 7, 2025 12:45
@Argmaster
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Well, since ikabod didn't share their opinion I assume they are happy with the result, so only technical reviews are required for this PR

@IntegratedQuantum
Copy link
Member

Let's not rush things. This certainly does need an artistic review first.

@IntegratedQuantum
Copy link
Member

So, @ikabod-kee could you please review this? I would like to merge this before the play session tomorrow.

@ikabod-kee
Copy link
Collaborator

Sure thing

Copy link
Collaborator

@ikabod-kee ikabod-kee left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Alright, reviewed. I actually quite like the roots without tree attachments in practice. The file structure isn't quite my cup of tea though, but hey, it's your tree, and it works!

Copy link
Member

@IntegratedQuantum IntegratedQuantum left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Honestly the file structure is a mess, and the files themselves are kind of unreviewable.

We really need some better to visualize these as well as their relations before we end up with a directory tree of thousands of random files that no one can search through.
Maybe #1387, maybe some kind of 3d tree diagram, maybe both

@IntegratedQuantum
Copy link
Member

Since all of ikabods concerns have been addressed, I'll assume that this is ready for merge.

@IntegratedQuantum IntegratedQuantum merged commit fe09535 into PixelGuys:master Jun 17, 2025
1 check passed
@IntegratedQuantum IntegratedQuantum mentioned this pull request Jul 22, 2025
21 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants