tters-requ...@blender.org wrote:
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2021 01:17:28 -0400
From: Ryan Inch
To:bf-committers@blender.org
Subject: Re: [Bf-committers] Blender 2.93 Released!
Message-ID:<03c07ca6-6ffd-b03a-68c0-19849cbaf...@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
After th
After thinking some more on this, I can see why this is appealing,
however, Blender is in the unique position of including add-ons as an
integral part. This makes it more inclusive than other software and
provides a good way to onboard new, Blender, developers. An online
repository for
No, there are no such plans.
On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 8:47 AM Ryan Inch via Bf-committers <
bf-committers@blender.org> wrote:
> @ The core developers considering this repository idea.
> With this new online add-on repository you are proposing, you have
> talked about unifying add-on distribution,
@ The core developers considering this repository idea.
With this new online add-on repository you are proposing, you have
talked about unifying add-on distribution, so I feel I have to ask, are
there any plans to allow only add-ons from this repository to run in
Blender or any other
(Apologies for sending this twice, I forgot to change the subject from
the generic digest one for my first attempt at sending this email)
@ Sybren A. Stüvel
I disagree here. Having an online repository would:
- make updating add-ons easier, allowing add-on developersto push
updates
Also, maybe of interest: SLSA
https://thehackernews.com/2021/06/google-releases-new-framework-to.html
On Thu, Jun 17, 2021, 11:57 PM Dan McGrath wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Just a thought, assuming only non commercial add-ons, but is there any use
> in pushing such a add-on system into the python pip
Hi,
Just a thought, assuming only non commercial add-ons, but is there any use
in pushing such a add-on system into the python pip repos?
As long as you own the namespace, like blender-*, for example, you would at
least be able to offload the hosting burden to pip, as well as benefit from
their
There are certainly challenges implementing such a system, though it's been
done many times in other applications. It's too early to go into such
details, it's not clear this will even happen or when.
On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 10:14 PM Dan McGrath
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> For an official online
Hello,
The latest release page at https://www.blender.org/download/releases/2-93/
ends with a section called "But Wait, There're More". That section of links
could
easily have one added with a label of "Many Add-on Changes" that links to
Hi,
For an official online repository that is integrated into Blender, users
> would not notice much difference compared to bundled add-ons. I think it
> would be valuable to have a way for more developers to share their add-ons
> in the same way.
>
Out of curiosity, where and how were you
> Ryan
>
> On 2021-06-12 06:00 AM, bf-committers-requ...@blender.org wrote:
> > Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2021 16:44:40 +0200
> > From: Dalai Felinto
> > To: bf-blender developers
> > Subject: Re: [Bf-committers] Blender 2.93 Released!
> > Message-ID:
> >qf-
On Thu, 17 Jun 2021 at 07:51, Ryan Inch via Bf-committers <
bf-committers@blender.org> wrote:
> Bundling does make a difference because it marks the add-ons as
> officially endorsed by Blender, they are available to every blender user
> and these add-ons are universally recognized and frequently
1]https://www.blender.org/download/releases/2-93/
On 2021-06-07 06:00 AM,bf-committers-requ...@blender.org wrote:
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2021 10:05:36 +0200
From: Dalai Felinto
To: bf-blender developers
Subject: Re: [Bf-committers] Blender 2.93 Released!
Message-ID:
zavhavyzc5rws4jbbg1m...@mail.
So, what
>> is required to have an add-ons section added to the 'fancy' release notes?
>>
>> Ryan
>>
>> [1] https://www.blender.org/download/releases/2-93/
>>
>> On 2021-06-07 06:00 AM, bf-committers-requ...@blender.org wrote:
>> > Date: Mon,
y. So, what
> > is required to have an add-ons section added to the 'fancy' release
> notes?
> >
> > Ryan
> >
> > [1] https://www.blender.org/download/releases/2-93/
> >
> > On 2021-06-07 06:00 AM, bf-committers-requ...@blender.org wrote:
> > >
ate: Mon, 7 Jun 2021 10:05:36 +0200
> > From: Dalai Felinto
> > To: bf-blender developers
> > Subject: Re: [Bf-committers] Blender 2.93 Released!
> > Message-ID:
> >zavhavyzc5rws4jbbg1m...@mail.gmail.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8&
notes?
Ryan
[1] https://www.blender.org/download/releases/2-93/
On 2021-06-07 06:00 AM, bf-committers-requ...@blender.org wrote:
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2021 10:05:36 +0200
From: Dalai Felinto
To: bf-blender developers
Subject: Re: [Bf-committers] Blender 2.93 Released!
Message-ID:
Content-Type
Hi Ryan,
Are you talking about an add-on in particular? There are two related but
separate topics in your email:
1. Contributors credit
The script that generates the credits [1] is indeed be skipping the add-on
repositories.
2. Release notes
It is the responsibility of any developer that
Congratulations on the release! Everything looks good, there seems to
be tons of great improvements,
and the reels are quite impressive.
However, I have noticed that Add-ons are treated differently in the
release notes. Judging by the emails from the bf-extensions mailing
list, many of the
Hi everyone,
Congrats with the release!
I don't have enough time to watch everything that goes on nowadays - but
each time I check, I see blender.org channels buzzing with activity. The
community of volunteers online who help out is bigger than ever. Virtual
hugs from me for everyone who
20 matches
Mail list logo
