On Mon, Jan 17, 2022 at 11:12 PM Bastien Montagne via Bf-committers <bf-committers@blender.org> wrote: > > Hi Sergey and all, and thanks for this proposition. > > This proposal makes complete sense to me. I do not see any benefit for > Blender to stick to a strict compatibility with VFX platform, but indeed > ensuring a file-level compatibility seems a good minimum guaranty. > > I have one question though, should we still guarantee that we keep > Blender working with the VFX platform versions of the libraries, or not? > E.g. do we keep Blender working with python 3.9, even if we switch our > own builds to 3.11? Think the answer to this question should also be > clearly stated. > > And if we do keep this compatibility level, how do we ensure it? Add new > buildbot instances with VFX-versioned dependencies? Just 'do our best' > and fix issues when reported?
For other libraries, I don't have a strong opinion, for Python though - keeping *official* support for multiple versions adds too much overhead. Even for tracker triage, switching Python versions to match the user who's reporting takes extra time. And as you mention - integrating this into the build-bot etc would be needed too (ideally at least) We could consider *unofficial* support by not breaking builds for older Python versions for a period of time, meaning that users who have a requirement for an older version can still build Blender themselves. Although I'm not sure this is an important use case, just noting that I wouldn't rule it out entirely. > Cheers, > Bastien > > _______________________________________________ > Bf-committers mailing list > Bf-committers@blender.org > List details, subscription details or unsubscribe: > https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers -- - Campbell _______________________________________________ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org List details, subscription details or unsubscribe: https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers