Hi Aligorith, I think the data-loss aspect of this is more important that solution elegance or system consistency. I agree that simply reverting to having actions having fake users by default is not a good long-term solution. But unless we can guarantee that we will have a good solution in the very next release (2.63) then IMO we need to revert back as a stop-gap solution while we figure out a better long-term strategy.
The data-loss aspect of this is too important to be ignored for another release. I am definitely interested in the patch you mention. Can you give a brief outline of how it would affect action management and address this problem? In the end, I still feel like the long-term solution is to change Blender's user-facing data management model to something less garbage-collection oriented. But that's obviously a long way off, and so we'll need something else in the short/mid-term. --Nathan On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 3:56 AM, Joshua Leung <aligor...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > I've just finished going through all the arguments about this so far, > and have written up my thoughts on this whole issue [1]. > > Here's the summary: > 1) I do not think that simply "reverting the default" is a good idea. > It the "blue pill option", which just doesn't solve the issue at all, > apart from for the people complaining. > > 2) The discussions about asset management tools and whatnot are just > that. Pie in the sky stuff that will not be in place anytime soon, and > which still has a look of unknowns attached to it which requires > significant developer time. As people have mentioned, we have some > other concerns that need addressing first. > > 3) I propose that we look at this another way, and solve the root > cause of the problems with why people are loosing actions. They're > creating "action libraries", where they animate multiple actions for a > single object/datablock. However, we currently have no way of knowing > that those actions they have created are in any way associated with > these datablocks. > > Now, I've seen a patch in the patch tracker which does address these > issues. I've reviewed it a few times, and in light of this debate, > will do so again when I get time in the next week. IMO, this is the > approach we should take. > > Regards, > Aligorith > > --- > > [1] > http://aligorith.blogspot.co.nz/2012/03/response-to-action-fake-user-issue.html > _______________________________________________ > 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