On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 2:31 PM, Matt Ebb <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 2:13 PM, Campbell Barton <[email protected]>wrote: > >> 3) Operator Options - don't mean regular operator options, rather >> operator options that store the settings used in the >> scene->toolsettings, for re-use. This is how LSCM Unwrap options are >> exposed, since the settings used apply to live unwrap, not just on >> executing the operator. >> > > Ideally, *all* operator properties should be stored for re-use later - so > when you run an operator, then run it again, it will default to the last > most recently used properties. Perhaps a little button to reset the operator > properties to factory defaults too. I think we discussed this a bit at the > winter camp so many moons ago, but nothing concrete emerged from it.
Agree, this is infact not that hard to do if we just the existing operator history - Ton suggested this recently. > As for Live Unwrap, this is an exception rather than a rule because it's a > weird implementation. Live Unwrap shouldn't be using properties from the > unwrap operator, it should have it's own properties since it's a different > tool. As for where those properties can be, I can see in this case it could > go quite easily as a menu option next to where live unwrap is, eg. Live > Unwrap Algorithm -> Conformal / Angle Based (or whatever naming makes > sense). Failing that it could go in the image editor UV panels when live > unwrap is enabled. So for 2 exmaples: Unwrap can have a settings menu which can be in both. * Image Space -> UVs -> Live Unwrap Settings (toggle under live unwrap option) * 3D View Space -> UV Mapping Menu -> UV Unwrap Settings (toggle under Unwrap) --- *this one is a bit awkward IMHO* Edge Slide UV options * 3D View Space -> Mesh -> Edges -> Edge Slide UV Correct (toggle under Edge Slide) ... will go in Ctrl+E menu too - same menu in this case. > tl;dr: > * +1 to storing settings for *all* operators, with a nice button in the op > properties to rest to factory defaults +1 also :) > * Huge -1 to persistent 'settings' panels like in 2.4x that don't relate to > anything you're doing in context. Must say this solution feels un-inspired and combersome - "Lets solve by adding more panels", But I'm, not convinced that adding options in menus is great either - although it can work. Also interested in feedback on the NDof UI and how best to re-arrange. > Matt > _______________________________________________ > 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
