re: merging nurbs. Its great to hear its ready to merge (or very close), last I looked into the nurbs branch It was so hard to tell what was supposed to be working.
Id recommend... - getting all the old tools in 2.5 first, didn't think there was that much left to do, (take a day or 2?), - review the branch - I could review some areas I'm familiar with, anyone else able to help with review?. - merge when we can validate the branch works as well as trunk - continue development in trunk (new features/tools etc). On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 8:07 PM, Emmanuel Stone <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 7:39 AM, Tom M <[email protected]> wrote: >> 3) other merges (BMesh, NURBS) need to be evaluated for feasibility yet > > The NURBS branch is stable and mature enough to offer a replacement > for the existing NURBS tools. I'm not sure if it makes more sense to > commit this first without adding much new functionality, or to wait > until there are many new/improved tools. 2.5 is missing a lot of the > old tools, so I'm planning to revisit a lot of those. > > I will have a significant chunk of time to work on this at the > beginning of 2010. I'm happy to keep working on my branch, but if it's > needed I'm happy to commit the 'NURBS engine' to trunk and work from > that instead. > > -Emmanuel > _______________________________________________ > Bf-committers mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers > -- - Campbell _______________________________________________ Bf-committers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
