I would say if frameserver (in his current state) is still helpful for some usages, let's keep it as is for at least a while. If it's buggy / unstable/ unusable i would rather either completely remove it or at least IFDEF it.
Even if some tool could be useful for somebody, we should either deliver it in a useful way or not try to deliver it at all. In other words it's about quality of tools, not quantity of them. Do not forget that blender is mainly 3d modeling/rendering application, not a video editor, so lack of some specific for video editor tools doesn't seem to be problem here for me. Another question is -- if frameserver would be decided to be kept, who's gonna to maintain it? Think neither me nor Campbell or Brecht would have time to work on frameserver, but as Thomas mentioned we still do have reports about that area. So, any volunteers? On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 10:06 AM, Carsten Wartmann <[email protected]> wrote: > Am 05.08.2012 14:06, schrieb Thomas Dinges: > > versions) so NOBODY reported it, and therefore NOBODY cared / seriously > > used it, otherwise it would have been reported way earlier. > > People using the frameserver tend to do long projects where it is always > a risk to switch versions. Thats also an assumption of course ;-) > > Carsten > -- > Carsten Wartmann: Autor - Dozent - 3D - Grafik > Homepage: http://blenderbuch.de/ > Das Blender-Buch: http://blenderbuch.de/redirect.html > _______________________________________________ > Bf-committers mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers > -- With best regards, Sergey Sharybin _______________________________________________ Bf-committers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
