[Bf-committers] GSoC 2017: Cycles features & Package management

Sybren A. Stüvel sybren at stuvel.eu
Wed Mar 22 14:04:39 CET 2017


On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 07:46:10PM -0700, gandalf3 wrote:
> Package manager:
> My first thought is: what exactly would a "package" be? I see the
> design doc[1] mentions they may contain things besides addons. What
> else might a package contain, and how would different kinds of
> content be differentiated?

I think that for now we can focus on add-ons, with the understanding
that in the end "packages" could just mean ZIP files that can be
extracted in a location that depends on some "package type".

Two package types I can think of now:

- Add-ons themselves: just Python code with minimal resource files
- Add-on data: the resource files that should NOT be placed into
  ~/.config/blender/{version}. However, posisbly a nicer design would
  be to let the add-ons themselves download their data, instead of the
  package manager.

> I think painlessly supporting existing addons sounds nice (i.e. no
> extra "package metadata" files), but I'm not sure how that could be
> done while cleanly allowing for new kinds of packages in the future?

We'll most likely need package metadata files on the package
repository servers. However, those can be created from the bl_info
dicts in the add-ons.

> (Would addons themselves be able to define package types?)

For now, let's not.

> Where and how would be the preferred way to do this?

I think this mailing list and IRC are fine.

Sybren A. Stüvel

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.blender.org/pipermail/bf-committers/attachments/20170322/5efbfc60/attachment.pgp 

More information about the Bf-committers mailing list