Multiple people working on a single image sounds ridiculous indeed, but with 3D, it's a different story. Especially if you use Blender to create game environments, multiple working working on the map is really a use case. Since Blender isn't designed to stream 3d content, a sharing feature should be kept simple. So how about a button to update linked library objects? That way, one could sort of work on the same scene.
Am 26.04.2013 10:27, schrieb Ton Roosendaal: > Hi, > > Oh - yeah I was interpreting it as similar to how we setup pipelines in a > studio. Where you keep the .blends individually owned, and link in data. > > Work on the same .blend scene together is a specification that would right go > deep into the core of Blender's design. I wouldn't recommend to try this, nor > do I think it would become a succesful project with the current state of > Blender. > > The issue of efficient data sharing for projects is really something you can > handle on a meta level, and not try to do it on vertex/objects level or on > tools. > > Take GIMP for example. It sounds fun to have 2 people do operations on 1 > image, but if this is useful? In practice, ownership of such data is really > not a limitation. > > That goes for character rigs, models, environments, props, etc. Easy to > design a data structure based on .blends being managed by individuals. > > -Ton- > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Ton Roosendaal Blender Foundation [email protected] www.blender.org > Blender Institute Entrepotdok 57A 1018AD Amsterdam The Netherlands > > On 26 Apr, 2013, at 1:22, Brecht Van Lommel wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 11:38 PM, Moisés Bonilla <[email protected]> wrote: >>> First of all, thanks for the quick response. >>> >>> Ton Roosendaal: That idea about the "normalized" file IO sounds good. Do >>> you think that maybe I could start thinking about the case when two people >>> starts with a empty scene and each one sends to the other simple commands >>> (Create cube at ..., Rotate object ..., etc)? >> >> I think Ton misunderstood what you were proposing? Handling network >> paths is quite different from realtime sharing. >> >>> And no, although summer of code sounds interesting, I would prefer to "take >>> it easy" for now :). Anyway, I should start by proposing the project in the >>> wiki, isn't it? >> >> Yes, you can add make a wiki page about the project. >> >> But note that there's a reason Verse was never finished and >> integrated. If it's a research project where you create a proof of >> concept then it can work, but to make this ready for production use is >> problematic. That's because there are many different data structures >> and editing operations in Blender, and they weren't designed with this >> kind of thing in mind. It's quite possible to make it work for a small >> subset of those, but supporting this across Blender in a way that's >> reliable and maintainable probably requires a major redesign of >> Blender internals. >> >> Brecht. >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > _______________________________________________ Bf-committers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
