[Bf-committers] Bug tracker stats + engine future...
Christopher.Maddock.1 at uni.massey.ac.nz
Fri Mar 25 13:08:49 CET 2005
I just don't have a lot of time at the moment. I've just committed some stuff
from Erwin (mail me if it breaks stuff) for abstracting the physics engine so
hopefully we can make progress, and use eg ODE as well. There are still some
major bugs, but it is a start. I'll look at it some more over Easter
I don't think splitting it off is a good idea - it will just be easier to let
On Thursday 24 March 2005 23:06, Ton Roosendaal wrote:
> Did a cleanup of tracker. Still about 64 open report, of which:
> 25 Game engine
> 11 Python API
> 10 Confirmed bugs, waiting to be solved (with 6 related to rendering)
> 6 Unconfirmed bugs, pending research/feedback
> 5 Bugs in code we don't support now (subdivide, boolean, subsurf, IK)
> 3 Scripts bundled in
> 3 related to dependency graph
> The open python and scripts report seem to me partially solved
> already... might be nice signal for the py team to go over it one of
> these days. :)
> The 25 game engine bugs, almost all assigned to Kester, is a major
> issue yes... can't expect Kester to solve all by himself, but we can't
> keep this situation much longer either.
> Kester, how are you BTW! I can imagine it's not nice to be so less
> appreciated for all your work... nevertheless, we have to define how we
> move on. Suggestions we can think of todo;
> 1- Declare engine as "unstable" and "in development" still. Create a
> separate tracker for engine bugs, with a clear note that we like such
> reports in, but can't solve it all yet.
> 2- Leave the game engine in Blender and wait for a dev team to emerge.
> 3- Remove the engine from bf-blender, separate it in own project (own
> cvs) and wait for a dev team to turn this into an optional download,
> working as plugin for Blender (like yafray) but opening its own window
> (like a player). Opportunities for tighter exporting to other engines
> could be checked on (Worldforge, Ogre, etc).
> Already from a long past ago, I'm the main baddie to blame that we've
> got an engine in Blender. I really think it's an important & unique
> selling point for Blender. I also still firmly believe in the future of
> an integrated real-time/interactive 3d creation suite.
> Unfortunately for such a major feature it's not only "what you like to
> see happen", but especially "where does energy & interest go to". From
> open source management perspective, we should not release (too much)
> unsupported & unfinished & unused code in Blender.
> As for the current roadmap, with major restructuring plans in progress
> (displaylists & drawing, event system, dependency graph, armature
> animation system, softbody & physics, the 2.3 UI project) it's very
> clear where our interest and energy goes to. If we, as intended, like
> to go for a 2.4-stable this summer, we should also have decided if 2.4
> will have an engine, or not... from my perspective, I'd go for
> alternative 3... howver painful it is for a couple of *very* happy
> users of our interactivity tools <sob>!
> Ton Roosendaal Blender Foundation ton at blender.org
> Bf-committers mailing list
> Bf-committers at projects.blender.org
More information about the Bf-committers