Dear Campbell. > We don't have to be totally strict about where addons put panels and > knit picks, but think its worth attempting to make addons fit in with > blender and not overload addons with too much functionality. > Well, I see the point: separating things.
> but ideally IMHO, there would be an addon for import/export > and thats all it would do, > then if you wanted to have some panel with a bunch of various tools > this could be an addon distributed separately. If so, the best is to also modify the PDB addon since the same panel appears after importing a PDB file. 2 IOs + one panel for both. The panel needs then to be reduced, too: The part that helps 'reloading' structures wouldn't work anymore (and can be principally removed since we have shift+d). All this is possible, however, only in view of ... > I realize in practice this is more effort to integrate. ... the point you are mentioning: time. Furthermore: If we do all this, will the panel be also in trunc? If not, a user has to activate the two IOs, pdb and xyz, and then he has to install separately the panel - a solution I consider as 'complicated'. > For now, if you have time for this is best to make the obvious > improvements suggested in the code review and leave areas you are > uncertain about. Okay. What about: First focusing on the XYZ IO and trying to separate the importer from the panel. Meanwhile, I could fix some of the improvements suggested. How shall the panel be named? 'add_atomic_blender_panel.py'? Cheers, Blendphys. _______________________________________________ Bf-python mailing list [email protected] http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-python
