Am 25.12.2011 23:59, schrieb Joshua Leung: > On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 10:58 PM, Tobias Oelgarte > <[email protected]> wrote: >> For me this would be the most important things: >> * Treat bones like own objects. Currently we have this armature A >> depends on armature B and vice versa problem, even so there isn't a real >> cyclic dependency. This could also fix the delay between bones from the >> same armature connected by drivers. Currently it is treated as a cyclic >> dependency. > Really, just having finer granularity of the dependency/evaluation > handling will solve that. No need for talk of bones as true separate > objects. I meant it in the sense of finer granularity. >> * Let an action store the animation for multiple objects at once, not >> just only for armatures. > Currently possible, though as default we default to per ID-block. This > really depends on what ID block that the action is anchored to. The > article I wrote for proceedings should hopefully really ram this point > home. Sorry if i missed that. But which article? >> * Separate drivers from actions. Currently every action must inherit the >> drivers from a "driver action" or they won't be working, since they >> aren't there. > Wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong! Gah! > > Get them IPO's out of your head! Uhh. When did this change? The last time i tried it i lost my drivers, giving me the impression that they would be bound to the actions. >> * Give the the editors a tool to view the dependencies. They really like >> to see them to find possible errors, even if it is their own. >> > Agreed. > _______________________________________________ > Bf-committers mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers >
_______________________________________________ Bf-committers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
