[Bf-committers] Removing auto registration

[Campbell Barton]

Agree panel order shouldn't be a factor in this discussion, it should
be solved irrespective of registration so addons panels can be added
in a logical order.

Though I'm still for auto-registration removal even if its bug free,
most likely re-iterating from previous mails.

- to me it feels mysterious that blender is operating on classes
without being asked & errors don't trace back to authors code.
- in simple cases where all classes are registered its not a big win
to have it automatic, in complicated cases of dynamic runtime
registration this gets in the way.
- it makes internals more complicated we need to support - 3 cases:
direct execution, modules and addons.
- Matt Ebb and Nathan Vegdahl have complained about auto-registration
in its current state fir renderman support which does dynamic
generated classes from shaders, and rigify for rig types.

It is regrettable that I accepted this patch in the first place, but I
felt some obligation to do so since Martin addressed the issues that
concerned me, also because Brecht and Andria also approved of this
functionality at the time.

On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 5:02 PM, Martin Poirier <theeth at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Having panels in the order they are registered is the issue.
> We already discussed that last time.
>
> Martin
>
> --- On Sun, 1/16/11, Thomas Dinges <blender at dingto.de> wrote:
>
>> From: Thomas Dinges <blender at dingto.de>
>> Subject: Re: [Bf-committers] Removing auto registration
>> To: "bf-blender developers" <bf-committers at blender.org>
>> Received: Sunday, January 16, 2011, 11:54 AM
>> Hi,
>> regarding UI Panels, the auto registration caused lots of
>> order issues
>> there.  Having panels order in the same way the
>> classes are written in
>> the python file is not a good method.
>> Therefore +1 for revert.
>>
>> Am 16.01.2011 17:51, schrieb Brecht Van Lommel:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > In november there was already a discussion here about
>> python class
>> > auto registration, but there was no agreement on the
>> issue. So I was
>> > asked to try to cut the knot here, and I'm proposing
>> to revert to
>> > manual registration.
>> >
>> > On first thought, I prefer auto registration, because
>> it corresponds
>> > to how I envisioned the API working when doing RNA
>> design. But I also
>> > think the advantages are quite minor, and I agree
>> after reading the
>> > discussion that on larger projects it can add more
>> confusion. Also,
>> > there's a number of bugs and issues with it, which
>> haven't been
>> > resolved and don't seem like they will anytime soon.
>> Solving them will
>> > also make the API code more complicated.
>> >
>> > We could discuss the topic further, but it also seems
>> that a certain
>> > point this is a matter of preference. Campbell can do
>> the commit if
>> > there's no objection.
>> >
>> > Thanks
>> > Brecht.
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Bf-committers mailing list
>> > Bf-committers at blender.org
>> > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bf-committers mailing list
>> Bf-committers at blender.org
>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bf-committers mailing list
> Bf-committers at blender.org
> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>



-- 
- Campbell