Rhino.Compute - Create a Windows Server 2016 Computer

What does this really mean? Does it mean that I explicitly need a Windows Server 2016 license to install Rhino.Compute and that a Windows 10 Pro isn’t sufficient?

Screenshot from GitHub :

// Rolf

You can run compute on your own desktop where you have Rhino installed (Windows Server OS not required.) This is a common situation that I use for local debugging by sending requests to localhost.

The instructions on github are targeted for web server environments where you may be using servers from services like AWS, Azure, Google compute…


Could be a good idea to clarify that on that GitHub page. I almost dropped the idea of even trying when I read “Server 2016…” but then I considered asking for clarification :slight_smile:

// Rolf

I understood also it has to be a Windows machine, not Unix is that right?

This technology only works on a computer where you can install Windows Rhino V7 WIP, so… definitely no to Linux

1 Like

Yep, we have a lot to do still on the documentation front

also, this is an open source project so any contributions to things like documentation would be greatly appreciated

1 Like

Good! I cloned the repository and suggest a modified text on that line, from this text:

  1. Create a Windows Server 2016 computer.

to this text:

  1. Create a Windows Server 2016 computer. (Also a Windows 10 desktop computer with Rhino installed can be used, typically for developers sending debug requests to localhost).

To which branch should I commit the change, or should I (can I) create a new branch?

// Rolf

You would create a pull request for this so we can review, comment, modify, reject, or accept the changes. Github does a much better job of explaining this than I ever could.


OK, I had read that article but thought I had to commit to a specific branch to start with and only then post a pull request (I have not used git before so bear with me…, or perhaps Baer with me).

// Rolf

1 Like

On Github you generally first create a fork of the repository you want to contribute to. You clone your own fork. I suggest keeping the master branch untouched, create branches in your own fork, then create PRs from that branch to the original project.

image https://explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/File:git.png

If that doesn’t fix it, git.txt contains the phone number of a friend of mine who understands git. Just wait through a few minutes of ‘It’s really pretty simple, just think of branches as…’ and eventually you’ll learn the commands that will fix everything.


And after acceptance your contribution is not even mentioned!

Traces of authors are not removed. It should be apparent who contributed what with a few clicks.

1 Like

hmm, look at that… :slight_smile:


What an attitude you have. And you really want to be visible, even showing up in almost every thread on this forum.

And how is it your problem if my contributions (not yours) really wasn’t visible? I actually hadn’t even thought of it.

It’s about attitude. Is it even thinkable that one hand would give without the other hand knowing about it? Perhaps not, but there are strange people out there who chose to not count every little thing they do as a personal loss if they don’t get publicly rewarded. It’s about a consciously chosen attitude. Which becomes a habit. Which becomes part of your nature.

BTW, have you noticed how many people on this forum are very generous? They give and expect nothing back. At least not in public. Which makes all the difference.

So please, don’t be so bitter. At least refrain from spreading that attitude of yours in my threads.

// Rolf

1 Like

Why don’t you all get off my case. I am expressing my opinion like everybody else.

Like @gustojunk said “Grow the fuck up!”

Wrong about me. I would not have shared so many things if I cared.

Whenever I take some piece of code from someone I mention him in the script. My contribution was not. It is not a matter of publicity it is a matter of respect. Maybe my name is in that list but not in the actual script. My comment here is for McNeel that promote and are open for user contributions, they should mention the contributor properly. Which is btw the reason I did only one.

That does not concern you personally RIL. Explain then YOUR attitude?

That is incorrect. I just didn’t have the time to review and accept the pull request, partially because I was reading and attempting to figure out how to reply to posts like this.

RIL is accredited for his contribution on github (thanks RIL)

I think the wording needs further improvement, but this is a good start and has inspired me to review the section as a whole.


That’s great @stevebaer,

I only hope other McNeel do the same.

Probably yes. Tried to squeeze the line down to less than minimum. Such can end up sounding more strange than usual, even from a non-native like me. :blush:

But you fix it, I’m not picky. I’ll just try harder next time. Wish I could contribute more, at least on the documentation side.

Have a nice weekend!

// Rolf