Wed, 8 Jan 2003 13:43:09 +0100
Hi Jacek & everyone here,
Python in Blender always has been a very complex thing to implement and =20=
maintain. Each developer at NaN who worked at it had a different vision =20=
Daniel Dunbar did the first implementation (1.5), and changed it =20
halfway (1.8). Then Jan Walter revised it (2.0), and made it quite more =20=
complete. Erwin Coumans added the Game Engine API in a different way =20
(2.1). And finally Martin Strubel tried to get Python up to a more =20
mature level in Blender (2.2), but he got stuck...
I've had no direct involvement with the implementation itself. I only =20=
kept saying "keep it compatible" and "make sure it works". But that's =20=
something people don't like to do, it seems...
For Python in Blender to really work, we need a strict Python board =20
acting as a watchdog & gatekeeper on the actual implementation. =20
Preferably a mixed group of diehard coders and actual users of =20
Blender's Python. At the Python discussion board I already did a call =20=
for participation a couple of months ago. I will repeat that call, and =20=
also now here:
Anyone interested in maintaining and further improving Python in =20
Blender? I prefer to make this a seperate project at our =20
projects.blender.org site. Not only for the current 2.2x Blenders, but =20=
especially for the future, Python will play an increasingly important =20=
role... so there's quite some work to do, and honour to gather in this =20=
On Tuesday, Jan 7, 2003, at 18:50 Europe/Amsterdam, Michel Selten wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-01-06 at 21:37, Jacek Pop=B3awski wrote:
>> It's probably bad place to say that, but I am searching for people =20=
>> with fixing/changing Python API so we could discuss it. Please tell =20=
>> me where
>> should I go.
> In my opinion this is a perfect place to ask questions like you did :)
> Here is my idea on what should happen with the Python API:
> Get Python support back in Blender to the point it supports the same =20=
> as it did in the NaN days. In other words, for the end-user nothing
> seems to have changed.
> In future versions (at least after the feature freeze), design and
> implement new features for the Python API. In my opinion any new
> implementation of the API should be backwards compatible with older
> versions of Blender.
> With regards,
> Bf-committers mailing list
Ton Roosendaal Blender Foundation firstname.lastname@example.org