> I think the data-loss aspect of this is more important that solution Arg. Typos. Should be "more important than".
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 5:44 PM, Nathan Vegdahl <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Aligorith, > I think the data-loss aspect of this is more important that solution > elegance or system consistency. I agree that simply reverting to > having actions having fake users by default is not a good long-term > solution. But unless we can guarantee that we will have a good > solution in the very next release (2.63) then IMO we need to revert > back as a stop-gap solution while we figure out a better long-term > strategy. > > The data-loss aspect of this is too important to be ignored for another > release. > > I am definitely interested in the patch you mention. Can you give a > brief outline of how it would affect action management and address > this problem? > > In the end, I still feel like the long-term solution is to change > Blender's user-facing data management model to something less > garbage-collection oriented. But that's obviously a long way off, and > so we'll need something else in the short/mid-term. > > --Nathan > > > On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 3:56 AM, Joshua Leung <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> I've just finished going through all the arguments about this so far, >> and have written up my thoughts on this whole issue [1]. >> >> Here's the summary: >> 1) I do not think that simply "reverting the default" is a good idea. >> It the "blue pill option", which just doesn't solve the issue at all, >> apart from for the people complaining. >> >> 2) The discussions about asset management tools and whatnot are just >> that. Pie in the sky stuff that will not be in place anytime soon, and >> which still has a look of unknowns attached to it which requires >> significant developer time. As people have mentioned, we have some >> other concerns that need addressing first. >> >> 3) I propose that we look at this another way, and solve the root >> cause of the problems with why people are loosing actions. They're >> creating "action libraries", where they animate multiple actions for a >> single object/datablock. However, we currently have no way of knowing >> that those actions they have created are in any way associated with >> these datablocks. >> >> Now, I've seen a patch in the patch tracker which does address these >> issues. I've reviewed it a few times, and in light of this debate, >> will do so again when I get time in the next week. IMO, this is the >> approach we should take. >> >> Regards, >> Aligorith >> >> --- >> >> [1] >> http://aligorith.blogspot.co.nz/2012/03/response-to-action-fake-user-issue.html >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
