Agree panel order shouldn't be a factor in this discussion, it should be solved irrespective of registration so addons panels can be added in a logical order.
Though I'm still for auto-registration removal even if its bug free, most likely re-iterating from previous mails. - to me it feels mysterious that blender is operating on classes without being asked & errors don't trace back to authors code. - in simple cases where all classes are registered its not a big win to have it automatic, in complicated cases of dynamic runtime registration this gets in the way. - it makes internals more complicated we need to support - 3 cases: direct execution, modules and addons. - Matt Ebb and Nathan Vegdahl have complained about auto-registration in its current state fir renderman support which does dynamic generated classes from shaders, and rigify for rig types. It is regrettable that I accepted this patch in the first place, but I felt some obligation to do so since Martin addressed the issues that concerned me, also because Brecht and Andria also approved of this functionality at the time. On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 5:02 PM, Martin Poirier <the...@yahoo.com> wrote: > Having panels in the order they are registered is the issue. > We already discussed that last time. > > Martin > > --- On Sun, 1/16/11, Thomas Dinges <blen...@dingto.de> wrote: > >> From: Thomas Dinges <blen...@dingto.de> >> Subject: Re: [Bf-committers] Removing auto registration >> To: "bf-blender developers" <bf-committers@blender.org> >> Received: Sunday, January 16, 2011, 11:54 AM >> Hi, >> regarding UI Panels, the auto registration caused lots of >> order issues >> there. Having panels order in the same way the >> classes are written in >> the python file is not a good method. >> Therefore +1 for revert. >> >> Am 16.01.2011 17:51, schrieb Brecht Van Lommel: >> > Hi all, >> > >> > In november there was already a discussion here about >> python class >> > auto registration, but there was no agreement on the >> issue. So I was >> > asked to try to cut the knot here, and I'm proposing >> to revert to >> > manual registration. >> > >> > On first thought, I prefer auto registration, because >> it corresponds >> > to how I envisioned the API working when doing RNA >> design. But I also >> > think the advantages are quite minor, and I agree >> after reading the >> > discussion that on larger projects it can add more >> confusion. Also, >> > there's a number of bugs and issues with it, which >> haven't been >> > resolved and don't seem like they will anytime soon. >> Solving them will >> > also make the API code more complicated. >> > >> > We could discuss the topic further, but it also seems >> that a certain >> > point this is a matter of preference. Campbell can do >> the commit if >> > there's no objection. >> > >> > Thanks >> > Brecht. >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Bf-committers mailing list >> > Bf-committers@blender.org >> > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Bf-committers mailing list >> Bf-committers@blender.org >> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Bf-committers mailing list > Bf-committers@blender.org > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers > -- - Campbell _______________________________________________ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers