[Bf-committers] Bf-committers Digest, Vol 956, Issue 1

[Ryan Inch]

Hi, thanks for chiming in, you make some interesting points.

1. I don't think that curation will be the biggest hurdle, rather I 
think security, and the development of the repository and it's 
integration into Blender, that will require the most work.  All add-ons 
are curated already, must be licensed under the GPL, and I don't think 
anyone has proposed to allow payed add-ons to be hosted in this new 
repository (add-ons that link to commercial services seem like they will 
be disallowed soon, but that's a different thread)

2. This could be very useful.

3. This discussion came about because I felt that the bundled add-on 
authors, for whatever reason, were being omitted from important places 
of credit, namely the credits page and release notes on blender.org.  In 
response to my queries Brecht mentioned that they were thinking of 
moving the bundled add-ons to a separate online repository and that they 
would then be credited there, in some yet to be determined way.  So the 
two topics are related, moving the bundled add-ons to an online 
repository will further separate them from Blender, regardless of the 
benefits this repository may have for non-bundled add-ons.

On 2021-06-21 06:00 AM, bf-committers-request at blender.org wrote:
> Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2021 08:34:53 -0700
> From: Brian Savery<brian.savery at gmail.com>
> To:bf-committers at blender.org
> Subject: Re: [Bf-committers] Bf-committers Digest, Vol 956, Issue 1
> Message-ID:
> 	<CA+VsiZoUfhuWPuazaR0F5QGKt585GDu63t+v3PdxiyXc2hoaiA at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
> Re: add-ons in a repository vs distrubuted with blender.
>
> I think there are pros and cons to this but ultimately I think it's an
> overall good idea.
>
> I won't repeat all the points made previously but had a couple more
> thoughts.
>
> 1. The curation of this hypothetical repo and dealing with commercial
> add-ons or verifying quality or license seems the biggest hurdle to get
> this done.
>
> 2. Someone earlier in the thread mentioned using pypi directly as the
> add-on repo. I'm not sure that is the right idea but it does bring an
> interesting point that many addons have to load packages from pip. So maybe
> as a sidebar if there was a mechanisim to run "pip install Foo" as part of
> the addon download that would be a nice other benefit.
>
> 3. If the biggest complaint here from addons bundled with blender is that
> they don't get marketed "enough" in their view with the release of blender,
> that seems like a completely orthogonal issue to how add-ons are delivered.
>
> Brian
>
>
> -- brian.savery at gmail.com 508-274-8700