On Monday, 1 July 2013 at 20:21, David Jeske wrote:
On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 7:41 AM, Ton Roosendaal t...@blender.org
(mailto:t...@blender.org) wrote:
1) Include opt-in usage and automatic crash reporting in *every* blender
build, and a web dashboard to live usage/crash stats to devs
Am 29.06.2013 16:41, schrieb Ton Roosendaal:
- Where Python is too slow (I/O), we can also improve the api a lot still.
For our UI now it's more than fast enough.
There are two areas where it's notably slow: user preferences input and
addon UI - due to the high number of layout elements I
Hi,
Wouldn't it be possible to implement a c/c++ importer and expose it to the
python api in a compatible way?
The obj file structure is quite straightforward and should be easy to
implement. But I have no experience with blenders python interface.
/Jürgen
Am 02.07.2013 um 19:45 schrieb
On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 7:41 AM, Ton Roosendaal t...@blender.org wrote:
1) Include opt-in usage and automatic crash reporting in *every* blender
build, and a web dashboard to live usage/crash stats to devs and the
community.
I always wondered what other projects/companies do with such
Hi David,
I am confused. What takes you so long to get stuff to build?
It took me half an hour to get blender to build on MSVC 2008 with CMake the
first time.
~10 minutes download time.
~10 minutes finding out what to click in CMake-GUI
~10 minutes build time.
Now when I change blender code it
On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 12:17 AM, Jürgen Herrmann shadow...@me.com wrote:
I am confused. What takes you so long to get stuff to build?
Mostly because when unfamiliar with the tools and blender build, each small
mistake caused a 15-20 minute build cycle on my laptop.. the time added up
fast. If
On 29/06/2013, at 3:47 PM, Campbell Barton wrote:
Mono follows an MS spec for the language runtime (CLR), not sure what
the second program you refer to is.
At least the technology isn't owned by MS and its open-source.
People may be wary of using MS derived technology but from what I can
Hi,
Been busy all week with other stuff, interesting long thread :)
Quick observations below:
1) Include opt-in usage and automatic crash reporting in *every* blender
build, and a web dashboard to live usage/crash stats to devs and the
community.
I always wondered what other
On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 7:41 AM, Ton Roosendaal t...@blender.org wrote:
1) Include opt-in usage and automatic crash reporting in *every* blender
build, and a web dashboard to live usage/crash stats to devs and the
community.
I always wondered what other projects/companies do with such
Campbell Barton wrote
theres not much incentive to
rewrite - only for the sake of cleaner code.
I totally understand and wouldn't argue they should be, never touch a
working system and all that. Having the TODO make pep 8 compliant comment
in the header is also a good hint that they are perhaps
When I fix bugs in unfamiliar projects, I spend 90% of my time getting it
to build and playing sherlock holmes tracking down weak-linkages like
dynamic-typed variables and weak-linkages (like strings used as enums in C)
-- and 10% of my time actually trying to understand or fix code.
In strong
I think that you've hit upon two of the important factors here:
- familiarity
- discoverability
To which I would also add
- refactorability (is that a word? :-)
Those familiar with a project might not see the value in strong typing
simply because it doesn't add much to their personal
On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 7:13 AM, Jed Frechette jedfreche...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jun 2013 12:33 Campbell Barton ideasma...@gmail.com wrote
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 10:58 AM, Jed jedfreche...@gmail.com wrote:
I agree about the existing
Python code being hard to read.
Am happy to take
Yes, there is a performance cost for Mono/V8 relative to C, but for many
types of code that gap is quite small, about 1-3x
Speaking only as an artist:
LOL
I dare you to go to BlenderArtist and tell them you have decided to
include 2 Microsoft programs in Blender that will slow down there
On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 1:35 PM, Knapp magick.c...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, there is a performance cost for Mono/V8 relative to C, but for many
types of code that gap is quite small, about 1-3x
Speaking only as an artist:
LOL
I dare you to go to BlenderArtist and tell them you have
eeh, there is some misinformation here...
On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 7:54 AM, David Jeske dav...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 1:35 PM, Knapp magick.c...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, there is a performance cost for Mono/V8 relative to C, but for many
types of code that gap is quite small,
On Thu, 27 Jun 2013 12:33 Campbell Barton ideasma...@gmail.com wrote
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 10:58 AM, Jed jedfreche...@gmail.com wrote:
I agree about the existing
Python code being hard to read.
Am happy to take criticism for python code, but curious which parts
you found problematic to
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 10:49 PM, Benjamin Tolputt
btolp...@internode.on.net wrote:
...though now we have to define integral. I would like to see more
blender UI and experimental features built in a static-typed extension
language like C#/Mono or TypeScript.
I gotta say I neither want,
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 7:42 PM, David Jeske dav...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 10:49 PM, Benjamin Tolputt
btolp...@internode.on.net wrote:
...though now we have to define integral. I would like to see more
blender UI and experimental features built in a static-typed extension
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 4:56 AM, Campbell Barton ideasma...@gmail.comwrote:
This seems like admitting defeat before identifying the problem,
as if you say --- Blender crashes for me therefor you should use a
new language
I fear my wordy detail is confusing my message. What I'm trying to say
David Jeske wrote
In short, I want to help more of the blender community turn into blender
devs and debuggers.
...clip...
Python isn't used for
enough of blender, and the code which is there is very hard to read,
understand, change because there are no types and there is no compile
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 4:20 AM, David Jeske dav...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 4:56 AM, Campbell Barton ideasma...@gmail.comwrote:
This seems like admitting defeat before identifying the problem,
as if you say --- Blender crashes for me therefor you should use a
new language
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 10:58 AM, Jed jedfreche...@gmail.com wrote:
David Jeske wrote
In short, I want to help more of the blender community turn into blender
devs and debuggers.
...clip...
Python isn't used for
enough of blender, and the code which is there is very hard to read,
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 7:17 AM, David Jeske dav...@gmail.com wrote:
I like the overall structure of this roadmap.
It prompted me to cleanup and post my own 2013 Roadmap
Wishlisthttp://wiki.blender.org/index.php/June_2013_Roadmap_Wishlist_Jeske,
in-case it helps anyone's
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 7:19 AM, Campbell Barton ideasma...@gmail.comwrote:
1) Include opt-in usage and automatic crash reporting in *every* blender
build, and a web dashboard to live usage/crash stats to devs and the
community.
There is the case where users get crashes and dont report
Crash reporting might be useful but integrating this in a manner that makes
sense might be very intensive work.
You're not really trying to lure us into coding integral parts of blender in
python, c# or mono, are you?
A new/additional scripting language might be cool and is definitely something
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 12:40 PM, Jürgen Herrmann shadow...@me.com wrote:
You're not really trying to lure us into coding integral parts of blender
in python, c# or mono, are you?
No.. Blender core code is large and depends on many useful third party
C/C++ libraries. I'd guess it's going to
On 26/06/2013, at 3:07 PM, David Jeske wrote:
...though now we have to define integral. I would like to see more
blender UI and experimental features built in a static-typed extension
language like C#/Mono or TypeScript.
I gotta say I neither want, agree, nor think this will ever happen. I
I like the overall structure of this roadmap.
It prompted me to cleanup and post my own 2013 Roadmap
Wishlisthttp://wiki.blender.org/index.php/June_2013_Roadmap_Wishlist_Jeske,
in-case it helps anyone's thinking/brainstorming.
If Blender does only four things in the next few years, I would
I would like to know more about what Ton means by the line What should
then be dropped is the idea to make Blender have an embedded “true” game
engine from the blog post.
What exactly is proposed to be dropped here? It looks to me all that is
proposed to be dropped is an idea, changing the focus
Please don’t be stupid! Comparing XP and Linux on a market share basis
is just pure nonsense. There’s at least two huge differences between
those OS's:
*One is 12 years old, the other one is plain modern (don’t think anyone
would care to maintain Blender for over 10 years old linux, nor even
Hi Bastien,
Good to hear that I am not totally alone with my point of view ;-)
Ton sent in some interesting statistics of the blender.org website visitors:
http://lists.blender.org/pipermail/bf-committers/2013-May/040268.html
http://lists.blender.org/pipermail/bf-committers/2013-May/040269.html
In response to B. Tolputt's email, I think there are one or two things that
need to be addressed. Firstly, the animation tools are perfectly functional
in both Blender and BGE, unless you could clarify.
The multiplayer aspect is true, and something that I am working on, and
considering that unity
I think that Ton should be conscious that people don' t really know how
to use BGE.
Serious ressources about BGE like mike pan's files are 2.5 .blends.
You have to find a complex project to understand the meaning of states
in logic editor.
Yo!Frankie is outdated. There are few games that can
On 17/06/2013, at 8:22 PM, Angus Hollands wrote:
In response to B. Tolputt's email, I think there are one or two things that
need to be addressed. Firstly, the animation tools are perfectly functional
in both Blender and BGE, unless you could clarify.
Blender does not have Animation Blend
Hi,
We only have to respect two aspects for supported platforms:
- be able to move forward with Blender in ways we like to
- have developers available to keep platforms supported
Market shares don't have to play a role. I also don't know of any project here
that would practically require to
Hi Daniel,
I wrote the blog post as a discussion piece, something we can spend on for
months, or a year, or as much time we need. We have a quite long way to go
before a new GE can be defined to be feasible anyway.
I would also like to see a wide consensus about future plans for Blender. For
Really good reference of GE and Animation Tool integration is Source Film
Maker it's really powerful tool Allowing to record gameplay and edit it as
animations in traditional fashion, even if it's point cloud bake per frame.
Something like this could benefit Blender in new production workflows,
Ton,
Thank you for your response. It sounds like what you have in mind is
actually similar to thoughts I have already had for the game engine, though
perhaps on a more ambitious scale. It would certainly help BGE development
if more of the game engine code was shared with the rest of Blender.
I
Hi all,
Here's a write-up for projects and focus the next years:
http://code.blender.org/
Feedback welcome :)
-Ton-
Ton Roosendaal - t...@blender.org - www.blender.org
Chairman Blender Foundation - Producer Blender Institute
: [Bf-committers] Blender roadmap article on code blog
Hi all,
Here's a write-up for projects and focus the next years:
http://code.blender.org/
Feedback welcome :)
-Ton-
Ton Roosendaal - t...@blender.org - www.blender.org
Chairman
...@blender.org
[mailto:bf-committers-boun...@blender.org] Im Auftrag von Ton Roosendaal
Gesendet: Sonntag, 16. Juni 2013 15:45
An: bf-blender developers
Betreff: [Bf-committers] Blender roadmap article on code blog
Hi all,
Here's a write-up for projects and focus the next years:
http
-committers-boun...@blender.org
[mailto:bf-committers-boun...@blender.org] Im Auftrag von Ton Roosendaal
Gesendet: Sonntag, 16. Juni 2013 15:45
An: bf-blender developers
Betreff: [Bf-committers] Blender roadmap article on code blog
Hi all,
Here's a write-up for projects and focus the next
On 17/06/2013, at 11:46 AM, Daniel Stokes wrote:
Furthermore, I would like to point out that the BGE is at least
on par with the free version of Unity feature wise.
Firstly, let me state that whilst I actually approve of Ton's moves regarding
BGE, I'm not writing this email in an effort to
An: bf-blender developers
Betreff: [Bf-committers] Blender roadmap article on code blog
Hi all,
Here's a write-up for projects and focus the next years:
http://code.blender.org/
Feedback welcome :)
-Ton-
Ton Roosendaal - t
Regarding dropping the current BGE.
Not being as good as competition is a stupid argument (on its own),
quite a few of blenders features aren't as good as other software.
Why not kick out the video editor because its inferior to
most-commercial-video-editors ?
The problem IMHO is more that the
Hi Thomas,
You are right, I just said we should think about it, not do it right away ;)
But IMHO we are limiting ourselves to a technology that will get obsolete in
the future. Maybe I am a bit too fast on that one...
Maybe 3.0 would be a better choice for this.
/Jürgen
Am 17.06.2013 um 06:34
Hi,
you should keep in mind that Blender is also very much used in poor
countries, where a lot of people still use XP and X32.
At one point, yes we should not worry about Windows XP anymore, but
doing this before MS drops support is premature.
Dropping x32 will not happen any time soon though.
Drop linux. It has 1% market share, less than xp. No more x11 hacks. And
Mac OS X Tiger. Oops, too late. Somebody already did it.
On 6/17/2013 12:46 AM, Harley Acheson wrote:
Jürgen,
If we are considering dropping Windows XP we should probably also
consider dropping the other operating
Jürgen,
If we are considering dropping Windows XP we should probably also
consider dropping the other operating systems that have even less usage.
Which is everything else besides Windows 7. So every version of
Mac and all flavors of Linux combined. LOL
Harley
On 17/06/2013, at 2:41 PM, Campbell Barton wrote:
Not being as good as competition is a stupid argument (on its own),
quite a few of blenders features aren't as good as other software.
Agreed. On it's own, it's a terrible argument. After all, there are *dedicated*
game engines out there that
Okay! Now it gets ridiculous :-D
Guys you are right, market share is the point I missed.
But still in my opinion we are limiting blender to old tech whilst other 3D
software goes ahead and drops old stuff much faster ;-)
I think 2.9/3.0 won't be here before 2016, so I am talking about a 3-4 year
The timing here is unfortunate too.
It's not nice for Daniel Stokes to find out the BGE will be
discontinued the day he starts working on GSOC. (BGE Level of Detail
and Bug Fixing/Polishing)
Bug-fixing a system that gets removed in a year isn't such good use of
resources.
I was unaware of
On 17/06/2013, at 3:23 PM, Campbell Barton wrote:
Then it may be a good argument for Daniel to make a start on
interactive-animation tools,
If he is amenable to the switch, then that would make a decent compromise to
offer surely?
While this is a valid point, (as far as I know) none of
54 matches
Mail list logo
