Hi Sybren, It's simply crossed to me as a too much white & black answer, nothing else. I just read Tom new answer and I understand his original answer. So all is good.
> You don't appear like an avid hater, so why do you feel he is addressing you? > Cheers, > -- > Sybren A. St?vel --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hi Tom, Thanks for the welcome and the answer. Now I understand much better your points. I'm very glad to read you're open to suggestions form "commercial" software users. A simple argument can be used to those users that want feature X in Blender is asking them how many features suggested by them got implemented on their commercial X software. ;) I know several of mine were completly ignored in LW and Modo :D > My expectation was that we could use the dynamics of the 2.8 project to include that target. > But I'm still not convinced we are ready for it now. The project is too complicated, with too > many inactive stakeholders and not enough active contributors. But we make progress here... I read the document you attached yesterday, and I'm very glad to see where is going, and I guess you mean it was for the 2.8 branch and still under disscusion if it oges or not?. I liked the consolidation explained area by area, that will really streamline Blender and make it even better. I still have a lot to read on Blender internals to even know where to start to touch without breaking anything :) I'll try to do my best. To the OP (Daniel): I read that reddit thread, and I think better ignore it. Too much energy spent in a discussion that doesn't take anywhere. Cheers David. Message: 6 > Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 11:17:51 +0200 > From: Ton Roosendaal <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Bf-committers] Current state of Blender's user > experience (Ton Roosendaal) > To: bf-blender developers <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > Hi David, > > Thanks for sharing, I just addressed the Blender haters out there, not > users of other 3d tools. > > It is great that there are so many people involved with our projects who > used (or still use) commercial 3d software as well. We can learn from them, > especially because they were curious enough to invest time to figure out > how to use Blender, or what makes Blender good (enough to use) as well. > > So please feel welcome to hangout, help developers with their work or > contribute code. > > I often get mails from professionals who say "nice job on Blender, but..." > and then come with a list of favourite Maya or Max features. This might be > an acceptable consumer attitude towards commercial software, but it's very > not helpful for a public open source project. Dynamics here work > differently, it's not based on market shares or consumer satisfaction, it's > based one time and energy - contributions. > > It's also a misconception to think we didn't code awesome feature X or Y > because we didn't know it existed, or didn't know it was so important. > There's just not enough developers to contribute. > > So: how do we get studios or professionals organise Blender projects to > handle their favourite topics? I always tell them they're welcome, with > limited success. I learned that getting involved with FLOSS is not in their > DNA really. First of all it takes (a lot of) time, which is expensive for > pros. Second we cannot give a hard guarantee in advance that things will > work as planned or get accepted in releases. And third: corporate practices > is still based on secrecy and non-disclosure, participating in a public > project is regarded as a loss of competitive advantage. That is changing > (ILM, Pixar, etc), but hardly in small/medium sized companies. > > Because it could be so easy. If just 20 Maya/Max subscribers would decide > to invest in Blender what they'd give to Autodesk, they could hire a > developer to work for them full time - to fix mouse/keyboard input mapping > and configurability for example, snapping tools, and other very useful > projects. > > My expectation was that we could use the dynamics of the 2.8 project to > include that target. But I'm still not convinced we are ready for it now. > The project is too complicated, with too many inactive stakeholders and not > enough active contributors. But we make progress here... > > -Ton- > > _______________________________________________ Bf-committers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
