[Bf-committers] [Bf-blender-cvs] SVN commit: /data/svn/bf-blender [34914] trunk/blender/release/scripts/ui/ properties_material.py: Commit patch [#25939] material panel proposal by Ervin Weber (lusque).

[Carsten Wartmann]

Am 16.02.2011 22:45, schrieb Thomas Dinges:
> Hi Carsten,
>
> Am 16.02.2011 22:15, schrieb Carsten Wartmann:
>> Roadmap: Beta = "Final Feature Set, Ready for Documentation".

As I already said before: I don't care about definitions of Beta or 
Alpha or RCs, I trust in the word (and I really have to, not beeing 
anymore in (or near) the core of Blender development) and this clearly 
says what I quoted above.

Its not my words its from: 
http://www.blender.org/development/release-logs/blender-256-beta/

Not a blog of somebody but a "highly offical" website b.o.

> But: What If you would be a documenter for Max or Maya? You could only

But I am not, and will never be. I put my heard, brain and blood into 
Blender for over 10 years now, so maybe I am not a neutral person for 
such discussions but there is a clear gap between what Blender claims to 
be an what Blender is nowadays. Ok but I stop now.

For the Max/Maya analogies: If I would work for autodesk I would 
*surely* use the real Beta versions of their products an getting fired 
if the final Book does not match the final version...

> I think Zanqdo explained the reasoning well. :)

Yea, surely helpfull. So could we come to a way of working where changes 
get documentated by the developer in a way a documentation monkey or a 
user can understand AND find it?

I think thats a big problem with Blender today. It grows faster that the 
docs. I think (from my POV) a new feature should not be going to trunk 
unless the developer provides a documentation. I offered my help here in 
the past, so devs, get you a docu-monkey and an artist.

Carsten

-- 
Carsten Wartmann: Autor - Dozent - 3D - Grafik
Homepage:         http://blenderbuch.de/
Das Blender-Buch: http://blenderbuch.de/redirect.html