[Bf-committers] Fix for #913 "inconsistent .B.blend loading/saving"
Mon, 26 Jan 2004 20:0:29 +0000
At 26-01-2004, 13:49:00 Bill Baxter wrote:
>And why should HOME not be $HOME, even on Windows, as
>long as the user has set it? BLI_getHome is already doing the check on
>Windows to see if they have it, and if not default to the install dir.
>That's fine. So the other functions shouldn't be ifdefing things for
>windows and explicitly referring to the install dir -- just call
Agreed, but this is where the transition period came in, whereby
you HAD to override BLI_getHome() in order to save elsewhere. Although,
I admit it wasn't handled as gracefully as it could have been... :)
>In any event, even on Windows it's useful to make a distinction between
>the "home" dir and "installation" dir. If you install Blender on a
>Windows computer, each user should still be able to have a unique
>>My argument is that since ~/.blender is now becoming more and more
>>important (already we've seen this used for translation files, and
>>now python scripts), it seemed the logical place for all blender's
>>external dependancies (excluding *.dlls, of course! :)).
>I agree. It would make sense to have a whole folder for per-user
>blender related stuff. But that's independent of the Windows issue so
>those changes shouldn't be in Windows ifdef blocks.
Yep, I also agree, however this issue was never tackled earlier and
at the time it seemed a very Windows-centric problem.
>Personally I think it should go like this:
>- if $BLENDERHOME is set, prefs should go there (*without* .blender/
>- else if $HOME is set, prefs should go there (+ .blender/ prefix).
>- else if Windows and USERPROFILE is set, prefs should go there (+ .blender)
>- else default to the installation dir (+ .blender/)
>The extra BLENDERHOME check would be nice in case you don't want your
>blender files to go the same place as everything else. (Say you have
>HOME set for Cygwin stuff, but want your blender stuff somewhere else)
>And aside from the $USERPROFILE check, I think that would be a good way
>to do it for UNIX too. At least for the .B.blend file.
>What do you think?
This sounds very reasonable to me...
Of course, if we do the above, we would have yet another transition period to
contend with. Perhaps the best option is to make the changes and force people
to re-create their defaults? (Which shouldn't be a HUGE problem if it is
clearly documented in the release notes).
Still, I'd like to hear from Ton or the others on how this should (or shouldn't)
affect the release schedule...
>I just saw my reply in context, and wanted to say sorry ... I didn't
>mean to come off as rude as I think that reads. Thanks for reading and
>responding to my rants. :-)
No problem! ;P