As a non-devel user I'm against the idea for exactly the reasons Terry is mentioning in his last email. It would be a hell for artists to set the compilation options to have the last git version working.
Regards, Vicente On 13 November 2014 15:36, Dalai Felinto <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 to the proposed idea > on top of that it would be nice to have a 'make release' or similar > option to mimic the settings used in the release build. > > It's worthy noting that the current CMake default settings are already > different than the release options (e.g., BlenderPlayer is not built > by default). The idea presented here only brings this a step further. > > Regards, > Dalai > -- > blendernetwork.org/dalai-felinto > www.dalaifelinto.com > > > 2014-11-13 13:14 GMT-02:00 AIBlender <[email protected]>: > > On 13/11/14 14:32, Sergey Sharybin wrote: > >> Addressing this: >> I understand the reasoning behind it Sergey, but if > new > >> people want to build Blender they should get something which is > approaching > >> a feature complete build, otherwise what is the point of using a Dev > build. > >> > >> Why would motion tracker developer want to deal with LLVM? Why new > modifier > >> guy would want to deal with Boost? Why compositor or dependency graph > guys > >> need to worry about any of external dependencies? This could be > continued.. > >> > >> For sure at some point developer would need to be able to compile > >> feature-complete blender, but forcing him to solve all the dependencies > >> from the very beginning is really scary for new developers. > >> > > > > If for every new dev you started turning off features because they get > > confused you end up with a very limited version of Blender. > > > > Any dev working on advanced features should be able to compile full > > versions of Blender, and that Ideally should be because a seasoned Dev > > has made Blender work with all feature enabled out of the box. > > > > Errors when features are turned back on are going to get reported and > > need fixing anyways, so may as well keep it working from the very > > beginning with all features on. > > > > Anyways my point is clear on this, sorry if it come across as aggressive > > but, turning off features is just hiding problems, and for people like > > me it will just mean I turn the features back on a complain a lot more > > forcefully if I get errors that run out of control because some feature > > was disabled because of some "scared" dev. > > > > Terry Wallwork > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Bf-committers mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers > _______________________________________________ > Bf-committers mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers > _______________________________________________ Bf-committers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
