Developer Meeting Notes: October 5, 2014
Ton Roosendaal shares the notes from today’s meeting in irc.freenode.net, #blendercoders.
Here are the notes from today’s meeting in irc.freenode.net #blendercoders
1) Release review
- The 2.72 release is now official! We even have a release log on blender.org. Special thanks to Marco Ardito!
- Still open to do credit list (I will do), and a readable list of relevant bugs (for users of 2.71 to know).
2) Targets for 2.73
- The current planning.
- Fracture modifier: has its own branch.
- Thomas Dinges reminds everyone about his proposal to make Cycles as default. He’d need help to finish the missing bits for it.
3) Other projects
- Four of our frequent coders have gathered in the studio of Blender Institute now. Read the first report – the discussions on the targets we’ll be working on.
- We need more help with patch review and bug tracker triaging… maybe inspire people via a Development Fund grant?
Thanks,
-Ton-
2.72 and still cannot move the f..ck….ing pivot point. is there a future implementation of this so very simple request? why do i have to make 3 commands instead of 1 to move that pivot point? in every other program i can move the pivot point. even in corel draw, autocad, not mentioning all other packages …even the old truespace, maya, cinema 4d, etc…everywhere i can change the pivot point. and everywhere i can close the window with a simple x sign. not in blender. so, a lot of work still to do…otherwise an amazing package…
Dude, calm down. That isn’t the way you talk to developers who give you a FREE software.
that is your naive belief, that the blender developer work for free? blender is free for you, but the developer get a lot of money. there is a lot of free software all around, but behind this some people make a lot of money. did you ever see the blender account and how much money are there through (also my) donation? i think, you will never see this, but believe me, the blender founding is quite impressive and the people around blender make a lot of money through the blender free advertising. but this is here not the point, but the pivot point.
I didn’t said that blender developers work for free, read carefully. No developer would work for free, that’s the fact. And any company should make at least some profit, otherwise it just wouldn’t stand. But you, with your donations, are getting blender for a tiny fraction of the price of all your mentioned apps (except truespace, maybe). And nobody is even forcing you to pay any price – just go to url and download. And yes, blender – as ANY other application needs improvement. But, as i said before, that’s not how you talk to a developer who gives you software for free. That is rude at least, from any point. Want any feature – ask politely, calmly.
I re-asked the originating question by proxy for the original asker. I thought it was a good point but needed re-stating, as you noted.
As if your attitude weren’t bad enough, you’re spewing fallacy everywhere, which is seriously ticking me off:
a) If you have a request, you make it formally like everyone else, through an avenue on the actual Blender website. And with some respect, like an adult.
b) Even if this were the place to do it, coming off as a complete ass is the fastest way to be ignored.
c) Don’t assume just because they receive donations, that they’re obliged to your snotty demands. Donations are accepted out of optional gratuity–you’re not buying stock in a company.
d) Oh, look. More fallacies.
What the hell are you basing this claim on? Your own (said) donation? If you’re going to make such a claim, back it up with a reference.
But given your utter lack of such, I’d say, you’re just making blind assumptions. Don’t claim as fact what you don’t have as fact.
Um, no. Not at all. The reality is, relatively few people ever see decent support for their free software, and even fewer make a full-time living from it.
Most free-software projects have very slow or short lives. Most see very slow development, go on an indefinite hiatus, or get abandoned altogether. Blender is an uncommon exception.
The minority of end-users of any free software will support development financially, and the developers do generally have lives beyond their (completely optional) development.
Though, brash people like yourself sure doesn’t help morale any. Don’t make their personal choice in development serve as an obligation to you.
Have you ever seen their account? Again, what in reality informs you that they’re making “tons” of money? You’re own instance of donation(s)? That’s fallacious.
Our contributions aren’t some sort of right to dictatorship. We don’t own stock in Blender your with donating. A donation isn’t a random.
Donations are accepted as gratitude and one wishing to support the overall effort–not a wishing well catered to someone’s sense of entitlement.
Again, where the hell are you getting your information here? What is the basis of your claimed certainty? You’re merely guessing, with an unverified authority.
And, again, whether they’re seeing support that’s “quite impressive,” or not, either way, you’re not driving things at Blender Foundation.
And finally, don’t assume the mere presence of advertisement necessarily equates to a great success with advertisement.
Ad revenue is much like fishing–not every spot is a hotspot, and not every that swims by will bite.
i and also probably +1000 people did this, if i remember also andrew price did that request in a tutorial, but no implementation so far. i cannot understand, they make smoke, fire, other really usefull but very complicated stuff, but they cannot make such a tiny modification. i post it also on many request posts from developers, even to Ton Roosendaal, but just: “yes, that will be implemented” and no change since 2.6. but as i said, alltoghether congrats to the developers, the package is impressive…
Well, now here is where I’ll have to agree with you. I, too, get a bit frustrated at times of Blender’s pattern of, shall we say, ad-hoc development?
Anyone who knows me around here knows that I can be “vocal,” to say the least. I’m no stranger to raising the point of how we’ll see tons of second-priority and spur-of-the-moment developments before higher, long-awaited priorities, such as tightening up Blender’s loose ends.
But still, why didn’t you just present your case here just as you wrote it there, right from the beginning? That is a better voice than going with a “Blender Foundation are loaded with money, and I’ve donated, so listen to me” route. You would’ve come off as a lot more reasonable, man.
July 9, 2014
312 members EUR 4225 / month*
That’s not much money, granted that’s just the recurring, but it’s a drop in the bucket for programming costs.
if you are not happy with the quality of blender,
1. change the source code for your needs.
or
2. change to an other software if you can find a better one.
exactly! no one is forcing anyone to use blender. They can always spend few extra grands with autodesk, if they want. :)
Well, actually, Maya LT is available for only $30/month now. All things considering, if you’re a professional or a hardcore hobbyist, that’s actually not a bad price. I’ve used it before, and it’s actually not a bad option.
Yes, price is not bad at all. But maya LT’s is very game orientated cutout of maya, for example it’s rendering features does not come even close to blender’s Cycles. lt does not have rendering options at all, as i know.
Or,
3. put your money on “option C” — shop the idea around to able coders here on BlenderNation. As it happens, user Open3Dart was able to take this idea and run with it. If Bart is following along, maybe we will see the results of Dart’s work as a news story here at this very site in the near future!
The request was worded a bit bluntly I agree, but it does seem like it would be straightforward to bind a hotkey or button to move the origin point for the mesh to the current selection, without invoking the 3d-cursor gymnastics and leaving edit mode. The mechanics already exist for orbiting the view around the current selection within edit mode, by simply hitting a single key on the numpad. Isn’t it therefore likewise possible to set the origin in one step, without leaving edit mode or snapping the cursor to the selection? I think it’s a good question. (And I hope I asked it well. :) )
Ctrl + Alt + Shift + C, or use the toolbar button.
I just thought of something.
Blender has a hotkey on the numpad that allows orbiting around the current selection in edit mode. Is the code responsible for this accessible to the Python interface, such that I could write an add-on that moves the pivot point there, as easily as it moves the viewport orbiting point? It would be a good project if I just knew how to get at it without being a C developer.
i have the problem that my viewport updates only if i cklick something,
for drop-down and hover menus this is really a problem. my workaround was
to enable screencast keys, if enabled, no lag occurs
is it possible, to write a small mini addon/script, that runs the update-whatever as screencast keys did?
Thanks a lot, guys. Blender 2.72 is a good step in the right direction. Keep up the good work.
@hanny: I think you speak about origin.
As pivot point can be used several thing.
Anyway have you tried Enhanced 3D Cursor?
http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Extensions:2.6/Py/Scripts/3D_interaction/Enhanced_3D_Cursor
This add-on enables you a several features with cursor. In general you can just by left click move and drag cursor and snap him to vert, edge, face, surface. Or just place cursor where ever you want and use cursor as pivot point for translations.
Or I use quite often add-on “Set Origin to Selected” (Alt+C)