So is it all for the locally-compiled Blender (meaning, both releases and buildbots stays the same as is)?
Keep in mind, while it might be fine on Windows/OSX you'll have some major problems on Linux (users will lat least need to re-compile all dependencies). And sure enough they'll run into weird compilation / linking errors (shall i here note that the guy who proposes to bump something must become responsive for the users communication and figuring out their problems caused by the bump? ;) Still either i'm missing something, or so far the motivation behind such a change is because we can do it. What are the benefits for users? What is the problem you're solving here? Why to rush such a thing? On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 9:44 PM, Martijn Berger <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 9:00 PM, Mike Erwin <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 8:45 AM, Martijn Berger < > [email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > The only mayor downside i see is that we would effectively drop OS X > 10.8 > > > and earlier. > > > > > > > Eek, dropping 10.6, 10.7 and 10.8 was not on our Blender 2.7x roadmap. > This > > would prevent 2.79 from running on lots of Macs that could handle it (GL > > 2.1 capable GPUs). Those same Macs are stuck with older GPUs so deciding > to > > drop them for Blender 2.8 was easier. > > > We never roadmapped dropping WIndows XP. That still has more users then > 10.7 and 10.8 combined judging form our google analytics. > 10.9 will soon be dropped from the official support roster by Apple. > > > > > Most people are running latest OS & Xcode and it is annoying to not be > able > > to type "make full" and run. By default I agree this should work. No > hoops! > > > It is not just about that. Most compilers and other packages are defaulting > to it. Compiling binary python stuff for use with the official blender > makes you jump through more hoops then most people can. Not many people > have a version of python compiled with msvc 2013 on windows when it is > officially deprecated and the official python release is with 2015. A > similar argument can be made for almost any package for python that > contains native code on MacOS they all use libc++ as that is the default. > > > > > Can we keep the ability to build for 10.6 thru 10.8 using an *older* > > Xcode/SDK? I keep a drive with 10.9 & older Xcode, but am not a build > > system guru. > > > Sure. release is not build on a machine that is kept up to date. It is > build on OS X 10.9 with code 6.3 and a clang version compiled by Jens. > > > > > For our next release we could have [Mac OS 10.6, 10.7, 10.8] and [Mac OS > > 10.9 & newer] downloads. That gives us a rough count how many people > > actually use the older system. > > Yes, we can also have windows XP and windows ME, 98 support. it is just a > question of adding some extra hands. If we care about user numbers we might > want to port to android soon. > > > > > > Mike Erwin > > musician, naturalist, pixel pusher, hacker extraordinaire > > _______________________________________________ > > Bf-committers mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers > > > _______________________________________________ > Bf-committers mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers > -- With best regards, Sergey Sharybin _______________________________________________ Bf-committers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
