[Bf-committers] RE: New 'merge tools' patch submitted to the patch tracker.

Geoffrey Bantle hairbat at yahoo.com
Wed Nov 23 14:49:14 CET 2005

>I find some issues. One is that nothing disallows a
Collapse Vertices,
>in the same style than Collapse Faces, that is by
groups. So for
>vertices, it would require 4-5 entries (Merge at
center, cursor, last,
>first * and Collapse Vertices).

I can add the option to collapse vertices by 'groups'
if you could convince me of the nessecity of it. I had
something similar planned called 'smart collapse' but
I decided that it was a bit of a useless feature. It
wouldnt be as simple as just collapsing the verts
grouped by faces, because you would want to consider
verts connected by edges as well....

>But the biggest one is that both Merge and Collapse
make sense in
>Edges, at the same time. Collapse makes |||| -> ....
and Merge should
>do |||| -> |. I think the difference is worth the
study of the naming,
>as one makes disappear and the other merges in the
old meaning of >many
>becoming one.

>Collapse Faces also represents a similar problem, as
it is not merging
>many into one, but making then vanish, and what is
more, paying
>attention to how they were connected.

I think this is a pretty good explanation for the
naming of the functions. The name describes what they
actually *do*. I didn't name the 'collapse face/edges'
functions, I just stole the existing terminology from
Wings/Mirai. I use these functions a lot now in
blender and personally I would have trouble calling
them 'merge faces/merge edges'. Those names just
wouldnt make a lot of sense in my mind.

>I would even suggest renaming the menu (and parent
entry in WKEY) to
>Melt for example, making the entries declare what
they do, instead of
>trying to cover all under a broad Merge name. That
would also open a
>path for other "Melting" tools.

>* I heard that one could become possible too, reason
for the vague
>"4-5". But just a rumor.

'Merge at first' is now in the updated patch at 

Anyway, I think the patch is still unnasigned in the
patcch tracker. Not to be a pain but is there any way
to get this actually looked at and considered for
commital? Mind you, I'm not entirely sure what to
expect from this whole process, so if I need to just
be patient, say so ;)

Geoffrey Bantle

More information about the Bf-committers mailing list