[Bf-committers] Linux Building: `install_deps.sh` is replaced by `install_linux_packages.py`

[Bastien Montagne via Bf-committers]

Hello everyone,

As agreed during January's Blender Admins meeting [1], the
`install_deps.sh` script has been removed and replaced by a new tool,
`install_linux_packages.py`.

You can find more details on this devtalk thread [2]

[1] https://devtalk.blender.org/t/2022-01-10-blender-admins-meeting/27254
[2]
https://devtalk.blender.org/t/linux-blender-building-replacement-of-install-deps-sh-by-install-linux-packages-py/28649

Cheers,
Bastien.
___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
List details, subscription details or unsubscribe:
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

[Bf-committers] Blender Birds of a Feather at Siggraph Asia 2022

[Bastien Montagne via Bf-committers]

Hi all,

Blender will be hosting a Birds of a Feather 
 
community meeting at SIGGRAPH Asia in Daegu, South Korea.


Feel free to check the post on Blender’s devtalk 
 
for more information.


When: Tuesday, December 6, 3:30pm - 5:00pm KST
Where: Room 321, Level 3, West Wing

Cheers,
Bastien
___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
List details, subscription details or unsubscribe:
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] developer.blender.org account disabled

[Bastien Montagne via Bf-committers]

OK then my bad. I'll re-enable your account, afraid we cannot really 
recover the original description unfortunately. Much sorry again.


Cheers,
Bastien

On 8/19/22 13:17, Mikhail Rachinskiy via Bf-committers wrote:

I did edit the description yesterday, I've added the link to my website.

--
Mikhail Rachinskiy
___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
List details, subscription details or unsubscribe:
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
List details, subscription details or unsubscribe:
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] developer.blender.org account disabled

[Bastien Montagne via Bf-committers]

Hi Mikhail

I did disable your account this morning as spam yes, can't be 100% sure 
(can have made a mistake), but afair it did has bad-looking links on it. 
Did you edit your profile description yesterday 18th August at around 
7:25PM CEST ?


If not, then your account was most likely hacked, think it would be best 
to create a new one with a new password.


Cheers,
Bastien

On 8/19/22 11:37, Mikhail Rachinskiy via Bf-committers wrote:

Hi,

My developer.blender.org account has been disabled, maybe because recently
I used VPN?
Could someone please enable it?

Account username: alm

--
Mikhail Rachinskiy
___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
List details, subscription details or unsubscribe:
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
List details, subscription details or unsubscribe:
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] Handling of user data.

[Bastien Montagne via Bf-committers]

Hi Ray,

We already have a task to address this issue:

https://developer.blender.org/T61209

But this needs time to be properly handled, and these days we spend 
everything besides regular maintenance on 'big projects', so... this one 
and several other relatively small core improvements and fixes keep 
being delayed from one release to the other.


-- Bastien

On 5/9/22 21:12, Ray Molenkamp via Bf-committers wrote:

All,

It's been years [1] (2018) since I last was rather
vocal on this subject, but how is this [2] still
happening? "Yes, blender deleted your data (and silently
at that), that means it's working correctly!" cannot
possibly be the best we can do, is it?

While I'm excited with all the directions blender
development is currently going, it's utterly depressing that
users are still losing data on a daily basis because
we can't quite get the basics right like "do not delete the
users data without their consent".

These are *NOT* isolated incidents [3]. Losing your
data and learning about "the fake user" shouldn't be
a right of passage to become "a real blender user".
Users shouldn't be silently *losing* data in an operation
ironically called *saving*. That's crazy, no other
application behaves like this!

Yes, I know this is how we have always done it. No,
this is not OK, never was.
  
Ton: Please make protecting the user’s data a

priority, as it doesn’t seem this will happen otherwise.

--Ray


[1] https://devtalk.blender.org/t/oh-no/505/2
[2] https://developer.blender.org/T97968
[3] https://devtalk.blender.org/t/more/22715

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
List details, subscription details or unsubscribe:
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
List details, subscription details or unsubscribe:
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] Proposal for clarified VFX Reference Platform Support

[Bastien Montagne via Bf-committers]

Hi Sergey and all, and thanks for this proposition.

This proposal makes complete sense to me. I do not see any benefit for 
Blender to stick to a strict compatibility with VFX platform, but indeed 
ensuring a file-level compatibility seems a good minimum guaranty.


I have one question though, should we still guarantee that we keep 
Blender working with the VFX platform versions of the libraries, or not? 
E.g. do we keep Blender working with python 3.9, even if we switch our 
own builds to 3.11? Think the answer to this question should also be 
clearly stated.


And if we do keep this compatibility level, how do we ensure it? Add new 
buildbot instances with VFX-versioned dependencies? Just 'do our best' 
and fix issues when reported?


Cheers,
Bastien

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
List details, subscription details or unsubscribe:
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] Blender 3.1 Preliminary Dates

[Bastien Montagne via Bf-committers]

Hi Dalai,

Since BCon2 is a fairly soft limit, and we do not plan to add that many 
new features in 3.1 (besides incremental improvements), I personally do 
not see a problem with it happening on 29th December?


End of the year is always a fairly low-activity moment anyway, would be 
nice if this encouraged all modules to commit to master in first half of 
December, instead of the day before BCon2. ;)


Cheers,
Bastien

On 11/2/21 4:35 PM, Dalai Felinto via Bf-committers wrote:

Hi,
I've updated the 3.1 project page [1] with a proposal for the Bcon dates:

* Bcon1, New features and changes, October 27, 2021
* Bcon2, Improve and stabilize, December 29, 2021
* Bcon3, Bug fixing only, January 26, 2021
* Bcon4, Prepare release, March 2, 2021
* Bcon5, Release, March 9, 2021

I basically added the corresponding weeks [2] based on when Bcon1 started.
I'm not happy with Bcon2 happening during the Christmas holidays, and would
love to hear what the modules think.

Note: I personally won't be around for the Bcon2 and the Bcon4 dates.

[1] - https://developer.blender.org/project/view/135/
[2] - https://wiki.blender.org/wiki/Process/Release_Cycle

Best regards,
-Dalai-

Dalai Felinto - da...@blender.org - www.blender.org
Blender Development Coordinator
Buikslotermeerplein 161, 1025 ET Amsterdam, the Netherlands
___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
List details, subscription details or unsubscribe:
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
List details, subscription details or unsubscribe:
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] Proxy Removal for Blender 3.0

[Bastien Montagne via Bf-committers]

Hmmm, assigning a local copy of the material to an overridde object is 
same issue basically (being complicated to get working), you either have 
to override also the obdata, since by default materials are assigned to 
obdata (meshes and the like), or change that later setting to assign 
materials to objects (in your library file)... But this is tricky to get 
working, order in which things get evaluated in RNA code also matters 
etc. Mine field.


The drivers on material properties should work though, since a few weeks?

Cheers,
Bastien

On 9/22/21 7:20 PM, Hadrien Brissaud wrote:
Alright, good to see this is known already. For clarity's sake, by 
"overriding material" I didn't mean changing individual node 
properties and connections and such, but linking a completely 
different material on the object (usually a copy of the linked one). I 
didn't actually expect overrides to the node tree topology/properties 
to be supported, that sounds awfully complex. It is probably simpler 
to approach "material variations on linked assets" through drivers 
between the object's custom properties and its material, which so far 
doesn't work either -this is something that I tried during production 
and eventually resorted to local materials because those drivers would 
fail upon linking the character.


Thanks for your reply, have a good evening

Hadrien


On Wed, 22 Sept 2021 at 10:43, Bastien Montagne via Bf-committers 
mailto:bf-committers@blender.org>> wrote:


Hi Hadrien,

Thanks for the feedback. Yes overrides of materials are still very
unreliable, this is due to how materials are weirdly related to both
Object and ObData IDs... not to mention that there is currently
almost
nothing overridable in materials anyway, so you would need to rely on
tricks (drivers and custom properties) to get some properties
editable etc.

Time was lacking to address this issue for 3.0, it is a known TODO
for
the near future, together with some other annoying limitations.

All development on liboverrides happens in master currently, no
branch
to try out.

Cheers,
Bastien

On 9/21/21 7:15 PM, Hadrien Brissaud wrote:
> Hi Bastien,
>
> as a user I am generally happy with overrides (thanks!!), except
when
> I need to override a material. Last I tested the behaviour was
rather
> unpredictable : an override was -seemingly- created, but on file
> reload it would revert to the linked material instead, and the
> override button was inoperative (greyed out). I will give this a
round
> of testing with latest master tonight, unless there is a specific
> branch I should check out ? I'm a bit out of the loop.
>
> Cheers,
>
    > Hadrien
>
> On Tue, 21 Sept 2021 at 16:32, Bastien Montagne via Bf-committers
> mailto:bf-committers@blender.org>
<mailto:bf-committers@blender.org
<mailto:bf-committers@blender.org>>> wrote:
>
>     Hi fellow users & developers
>
>     Now that library overrides gained maturity and are production
>     ready in
>     the 'character animation' case (where they replace the old
'proxy'
>     system), it is time to think about removing those proxies.
>
>     Plan is to commit in the coming days the following changes:
>       - Add auto-conversion of proxies into library overrides on
file
>     load;
>       - Remove the 'make proxy' operator.
>
>     For the time being, an option (OFF by default) will be added
to the
>     'Experimental' part of the User Preferences to skip converting
>     existing
>     proxies on file load. That way it is still possible to force
keeping
>     proxies if absolutely necessary, and/or for test purposes.
>
>     If everything goes well this option will be removed towards the
>     end of
>     BCon2 (end of October 2021). Full cleanup of internal proxy
>     evaluation
>     and management code can then happen during BCon1 of Blender 3.1.
>
>     Cheers,
>     Bastien
>
>     ___
>     Bf-committers mailing list
> Bf-committers@blender.org <mailto:Bf-committers@blender.org>
<mailto:Bf-committers@blender.org <mailto:Bf-committers@blender.org>>
>     List details, subscription details or unsubscribe:
> https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
<https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers>
>     <https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
<https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers>>
>
___
Bf-commit

Re: [Bf-committers] Proxy Removal for Blender 3.0

[Bastien Montagne via Bf-committers]

Hi Hadrien,

Thanks for the feedback. Yes overrides of materials are still very 
unreliable, this is due to how materials are weirdly related to both 
Object and ObData IDs... not to mention that there is currently almost 
nothing overridable in materials anyway, so you would need to rely on 
tricks (drivers and custom properties) to get some properties editable etc.


Time was lacking to address this issue for 3.0, it is a known TODO for 
the near future, together with some other annoying limitations.


All development on liboverrides happens in master currently, no branch 
to try out.


Cheers,
Bastien

On 9/21/21 7:15 PM, Hadrien Brissaud wrote:

Hi Bastien,

as a user I am generally happy with overrides (thanks!!), except when 
I need to override a material. Last I tested the behaviour was rather 
unpredictable : an override was -seemingly- created, but on file 
reload it would revert to the linked material instead, and the 
override button was inoperative (greyed out). I will give this a round 
of testing with latest master tonight, unless there is a specific 
branch I should check out ? I'm a bit out of the loop.


Cheers,

Hadrien

On Tue, 21 Sept 2021 at 16:32, Bastien Montagne via Bf-committers 
mailto:bf-committers@blender.org>> wrote:


Hi fellow users & developers

Now that library overrides gained maturity and are production
ready in
the 'character animation' case (where they replace the old 'proxy'
system), it is time to think about removing those proxies.

Plan is to commit in the coming days the following changes:
  - Add auto-conversion of proxies into library overrides on file
load;
  - Remove the 'make proxy' operator.

For the time being, an option (OFF by default) will be added to the
'Experimental' part of the User Preferences to skip converting
existing
proxies on file load. That way it is still possible to force keeping
proxies if absolutely necessary, and/or for test purposes.

If everything goes well this option will be removed towards the
end of
BCon2 (end of October 2021). Full cleanup of internal proxy
evaluation
and management code can then happen during BCon1 of Blender 3.1.

Cheers,
Bastien

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org <mailto:Bf-committers@blender.org>
List details, subscription details or unsubscribe:
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
<https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers>


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
List details, subscription details or unsubscribe:
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

[Bf-committers] Proxy Removal for Blender 3.0

[Bastien Montagne via Bf-committers]

Hi fellow users & developers

Now that library overrides gained maturity and are production ready in 
the 'character animation' case (where they replace the old 'proxy' 
system), it is time to think about removing those proxies.


Plan is to commit in the coming days the following changes:
 - Add auto-conversion of proxies into library overrides on file load;
 - Remove the 'make proxy' operator.

For the time being, an option (OFF by default) will be added to the 
'Experimental' part of the User Preferences to skip converting existing 
proxies on file load. That way it is still possible to force keeping 
proxies if absolutely necessary, and/or for test purposes.


If everything goes well this option will be removed towards the end of 
BCon2 (end of October 2021). Full cleanup of internal proxy evaluation 
and management code can then happen during BCon1 of Blender 3.1.


Cheers,
Bastien

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
List details, subscription details or unsubscribe:
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] *** SPAM *** Weekly Development Notes Followup

[Bastien Montagne via Bf-committers]

Hi Ryan,

Not sure how you see that as a personal attack? Fact is, I think 
spending half a day on something does earns it a note in the weekly report.


And yes, I was frustrated spending time having to demo the issue after 
explaining it's cause/source, finding again the exact use case 
triggering it, rebuilding both branch and master to ensure it was proper 
example, etc. We all have (tight) schedules and I was frustrated this 
was considered high priority enough to take it over more pressing 
matters for Blender 3.0 upcoming BCon2.


I know that expressing personal frustration may not be a good idea, but 
that does not in any case make it a personal attack, sorry if you felt 
it like that.


Cheers,
Bastien.

On 9/21/21 8:49 AM, Ryan Inch via Bf-committers wrote:

Hello Dalai,
I missed reading Bastien's weekly notes last week or I would have 
brought this issue up then.  In Bastien's notes for Week 425 - 09/04 
to 09/10, one of his notes is this: "Spent time on 
re-explaining/re-investigating T9599 (sigh…)."


In what case is it acceptable for a developer to put something like 
this in their official weekly development notes?  I was under the 
impression that personal attacks were not tolerated?  (And for the 
record it's D9599 not T)


Ryan

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
List details, subscription details or unsubscribe:
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
List details, subscription details or unsubscribe:
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] Deprecation of Phabricator

[Bastien Montagne via Bf-committers]

FYI, here is the (exhaustive and extensive) list of gitlab features, 
with their support in free/premium/ultimate plans:


https://about.gitlab.com/features/

On 6/4/21 10:15 AM, Dalai Felinto via Bf-committers wrote:

Hi Sebastian,

Which features you are referring to? CI/CD?

Thanks,
-Dalai-

Dalai Felinto - da...@blender.org - www.blender.org
Blender Development Coordinator
Buikslotermeerplein 161, 1025 ET Amsterdam, the Netherlands


Op do 3 jun. 2021 om 18:43 schreef Sebastian Parborg via Bf-committers <
bf-committers@blender.org>:


Just to keep everyone up to speed:

We talked a bit more on blender.chat and currently we are a bit sceptical
if we should go with gitlab as we might want to use some of its premium
features. Those are not part of the open source core, so that means
those are not free and open source software.

Therefore we are still going to evaluate other alternatives as well and
see which one gives us as much freedom and features as possible.

Regards,
Sebastian Parborg

On Thu, Jun 03, 2021 at 11:26:35AM +0200, Ton Roosendaal via Bf-committers
wrote:

Hi everyone,

I regularly have discussions with people around me about our
infrastructure. For as long Blender has been open source, almost 20
years, I've always pushed for the highest level of independence from
external service providers, specifically when it comes to our core
activities.

That comes at a price though. I'm aware of the great set of tools that
are being offered by Github nowadays. They make a good product. But I
also see how such services take away essential freedoms from developers.
If your activities becomes cloud based (compiling, testing, debugging,
deploying) you allow a lot of control over your project by a third party.

This doesn't make Github bad by itself, please use it if you wish. It
just means (for us) to keep the focus on our mission - which is to
further the freedom for everyone to make and use open source 3D
technology. That freedom applies to artists as well as developers. Or
said differently;

- everyone should have the freedom to develop Blender and participate in
blender.org projects.

  From the information I have, Gitlab seems to offer exactly what we need
for Blender to remain independent, keep up with the latest trends for
engineering and to offer this to an online community with a free/open
source license.

I look forward to a further investigation of this topic. Meanwhile I can
reach out to Gitlab to check on what support they're willing to offer to

us.

Thanks,

-Ton-

--
Ton Roosendaal - t...@blender.org - www.blender.org
Chairman Blender Foundation, CEO Blender Institute / Studio
Buikslotermeerplein 161, 1025 ET Amsterdam, the Netherlands


On 31/05/2021 18:26, Sergey Sharybin via Bf-committers wrote:

Hi,

Just wanted to let everyone know that today Phacility announced that
development of Phabricator is phasing out [1] [2].

This does not affect the Blender project immediately, but we need to

find a

solution to the situation (be it a fork of Phabricator, or be it a
migration to some other platform). There is no plan of action yet, it

will

be looked into in the coming time. We will keep you posted with

updates on

the topic.

Would like to mention that Sebastian Parborg together with Dalai are
working on a plan of action. At some point we'll share it with Blender
developers, triagers, and the community. So don't be surprised :)

[1]


https://admin.phacility.com/phame/post/view/11/phacility_is_winding_down_operations/

[2] https://secure.phabricator.com/

Best regards,
- Sergey -

Sergey Sharybin - ser...@blender.org - www.blender.org
Principal Software Engineer, Blender
Buikslotermeerplein 161, 1025 ET Amsterdam, the Netherlands
___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] VFX reference platform 2022 draft

[Bastien Montagne via Bf-committers]

Hi,

Regarding the python version selection, here is the detailed answer I 
just got from Nick Cannon on the VFX discussion list [1]:


From this year we are more strictly applying the policy that a version 
must be released by September 1st to be included in the Platform for 
the following year. The reason for this is to allow software providers 
to have time for testing and quality assurance with the final Platform 
before the window for publishing major releases against it.


We will still consider later change requests which we will share first 
with the Working Group, and then here on vfx-platform-discuss for 
feedback. Only if there are no objections raised will we adopt a late 
change into a Platform.


So an October release of Python is too late for our regular schedule, 
but it can be requested for a late change at which point we would 
solicit the community for feedback.


At least now we know. No idea how likely a late change request would be 
to be accepted though.


Bastien

[1] https://groups.google.com/g/vfx-platform-discuss/c/bnyJ2X1SwAw

On 5/19/21 4:55 AM, Campbell Barton via Bf-committers wrote:

I'm not too keen on tying ourselves to the VFX platform again (for
Python versions at least).

The VFX platform has a track record of not upgrading Python for
reasons that don't make sense for Blender (availability of Python-QT
bindings & some companies simply not wanting to upgrade).

Now Blender has a track record of not following the VFX platform when
it doesn't suit us, undermining our commitment to such a decision.
This can't be reassuring to the kinds of stakeholders who might find
some benefit in Blender using the VFX platform.

Blender used the VFX platform for long enough I think we would know if
it was giving us much/anything in the way of tangible benefits.


On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 12:14 AM Bastien Montagne via Bf-committers
 wrote:

Hi,

The only info regarding versions availability we have is that sentence:


A change in policy to only allow released versions to be included in
each year's VFX Reference Platform

This is fairly vague and unclear, since it does not specify any limit
date...

I asked about why they still stick to a fairly old python version on the
discussion thread Brecht linked (message is pending approval currently),
we'll see if we get an answer.

I would indeed much rather use a version of python that is actively
maintained during the whole year the VFX recommendations apply. And
python has a history track now of being reliable on their release dates,
so I do think VFX could be a bit less conservative on this tool (and go
back to an older version in October/November in the very unlikely case
that python would be unable to release 3.10 on time).

That being said, sticking to 3.9 for 2022 is not as bad as what they did
for 2021, so I would not be too annoyed if that was the case either.

Cheers,
Bastien


On 5/18/21 2:50 PM, Ray Molenkamp via Bf-committers wrote:

imho 3.9 is the only version they could have picked, the
proposed release date for 3.10 is 2021-10-04 [1]. While
the VFX platform aims to finalize in august [2]. I was
rather vocal last year for them putting versions on that
had not been released yet (some of which got delayed well
into 2021) I'm happy to see for 2022 a more conservative
stance has been taken.

With bugfix support for 3.9 ending on 2022-05-02 [3] that
does put them in an odd situation, they'll either have
to recommend a version that may not be released on time,
or recommend a version that will not see bug fixes for most
of the year. There seemingly is no winning solution here
since the problem appears to be the somewhat short
support window for python releases.

As much as I picked on them last year for making very
strange recommendations, I feel they struck a good balance
for 2022.

--Ray

[1] https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0619/
[2] https://vfxplatform.com/about/
[3] https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0596/

On 2021-05-18 2:47 a.m., Sybren A. Stüvel via Bf-committers wrote:

Hello,

On Mon, 17 May 2021 at 19:54, Brecht Van Lommel via Bf-committers <
bf-committers@blender.org> wrote:


There is a draft for the next VFX reference platform up now. Since we had
some issues with the last one, it would be good to give feedback if
necessary.


Good call.



Python was upgraded to 3.9, which will still trail behind 3.10 that will be
released this year. So the question about diverging or not will remain.


My preference would be to, for non-LTS releases at least, stick to versions
of Python that still receive bugfixes. In the past we've had crashes of
Blender that were due to a bug in Python. The only way to solve that was to
upgrade Python itself. This in itself is rare, but I don't remember having
such issues at all until we stuck to the old py3.7 to adhere to the VFX
Platform.

Is there anything known about the policy of the VFX Platform when it comes
to picking which Python version to stick to? Is it always going to be

Re: [Bf-committers] VFX reference platform 2022 draft

[Bastien Montagne via Bf-committers]

Hi,

The only info regarding versions availability we have is that sentence:

A change in policy to only allow released versions to be included in 
each year's VFX Reference Platform


This is fairly vague and unclear, since it does not specify any limit 
date...


I asked about why they still stick to a fairly old python version on the 
discussion thread Brecht linked (message is pending approval currently), 
we'll see if we get an answer.


I would indeed much rather use a version of python that is actively 
maintained during the whole year the VFX recommendations apply. And 
python has a history track now of being reliable on their release dates, 
so I do think VFX could be a bit less conservative on this tool (and go 
back to an older version in October/November in the very unlikely case 
that python would be unable to release 3.10 on time).


That being said, sticking to 3.9 for 2022 is not as bad as what they did 
for 2021, so I would not be too annoyed if that was the case either.


Cheers,
Bastien


On 5/18/21 2:50 PM, Ray Molenkamp via Bf-committers wrote:

imho 3.9 is the only version they could have picked, the
proposed release date for 3.10 is 2021-10-04 [1]. While
the VFX platform aims to finalize in august [2]. I was
rather vocal last year for them putting versions on that
had not been released yet (some of which got delayed well
into 2021) I'm happy to see for 2022 a more conservative
stance has been taken.

With bugfix support for 3.9 ending on 2022-05-02 [3] that
does put them in an odd situation, they'll either have
to recommend a version that may not be released on time,
or recommend a version that will not see bug fixes for most
of the year. There seemingly is no winning solution here
since the problem appears to be the somewhat short
support window for python releases.

As much as I picked on them last year for making very
strange recommendations, I feel they struck a good balance
for 2022.

--Ray

[1] https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0619/
[2] https://vfxplatform.com/about/
[3] https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0596/

On 2021-05-18 2:47 a.m., Sybren A. Stüvel via Bf-committers wrote:

Hello,

On Mon, 17 May 2021 at 19:54, Brecht Van Lommel via Bf-committers <
bf-committers@blender.org> wrote:


There is a draft for the next VFX reference platform up now. Since we had
some issues with the last one, it would be good to give feedback if
necessary.


Good call.



Python was upgraded to 3.9, which will still trail behind 3.10 that will be
released this year. So the question about diverging or not will remain.


My preference would be to, for non-LTS releases at least, stick to versions
of Python that still receive bugfixes. In the past we've had crashes of
Blender that were due to a bug in Python. The only way to solve that was to
upgrade Python itself. This in itself is rare, but I don't remember having
such issues at all until we stuck to the old py3.7 to adhere to the VFX
Platform.

Is there anything known about the policy of the VFX Platform when it comes
to picking which Python version to stick to? Is it always going to be
"whatever version was released a year earlier"? Or is there still an
acceleration happening after sticking to py2.7 so long, and will they
eventually be targeting the latest versions? If it's the latter I'd be fine
with following the VFX Platform and sticking to py3.9 for a while longer.
If sticking to the platform means that for a significant amount of time
we'll be on versions of Python that don't receive bugfixes any more, I'm
less positive.

Sybren
___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] Clang-Tidy: Request for Feedback

[Bastien Montagne via Bf-committers]

Hi, just my two cents, since I did not take part in this project in itself:


So here are some questions to the developers:

- Do you have a strong feeling about leaving a .clang-tidy file as it is
now (where file modification requires manual re-compilation) ?
I do not mind having to force clean rebuild once in a while if needed, 
no. Having this handled automatically would be nice of course, but does 
not look like a showstopper to me.

- Shall we enable it by default? Maybe for `make developer` ?


No, I don't think so, given the cost on building time. What I will 
likely do is having a dedicated build for that (like I have e.g. for 
lite builds for quick bisect, etc.), that I will run as part of clean-up 
& finalize process before committing, but not during on-going development.

Indeed, enabling it on CI seems a very good idea though.

Cheers,
Bastien

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] Tamil Translation request

[Bastien Montagne via Bf-committers]

Hi vanangamudi,

We have https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-translations-dev 
(and https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-translations-svn for 
the commits logs themselves).


All this (and more) information is listed/linked from the Translations 
project on phabricator (https://developer.blender.org/project/view/4/)


I will add you to the project, once you have contributed some 
translations to the svn repo (into the /branches part, you will need to 
create it since this would be a new translation language ;) ), I'll add 
Tamil to our supported languages.


Cheers,
Bastien

On 2/22/21 1:08 PM, பா. மு. செல்வக்குமார் via Bf-committers wrote:

Hi

I'd like to start working on translating blender into Tamil language. I
couldn't find a specific mailing list for translation. I already have an
account with blender dev portal but do not have any access except browsing.
Please direct me to proper channel.

https://developer.blender.org/p/vanangamudi/


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] Blender developer week notes - 2021.02.15

[Bastien Montagne via Bf-committers]

Hi Ray,

This is definitively a typo in the mail, we still have one month of 
BCon1 for 2.93. ;)


Regarding 2.92, I'd also like to point out that the 'features' column is 
still full of tasks [1], when it should have been cleared out weeks ago 
(when we switched to BCon3). Would be mice if all developers could go 
over those tasks and either close them, or retag them to 2.93 or other?


Cheers,
Bastien

[1] https://developer.blender.org/project/board/119/

On 2/15/21 7:30 PM, Ray Molenkamp via Bf-committers wrote:

* 2.93 bcon2 on 17 February.

This is listed on developer.blender.org as march 17
on both the front page [1] and the 2.93 schedule [2]

Did this change, or is it a typo?

--Ray


[1] https://developer.blender.org/
[2] https://developer.blender.org/project/view/125/

On 2021-02-15 11:19 a.m., Dalai Felinto via Bf-committers wrote:


Hi all,

Here are the compiled notes for this week's development. For the complete
report with modules and projects updates, links and images read it on:

https://devtalk.blender.org/t/15-february-2021/17475

Announcements
=
* Google Summer of Code Ideas page is still mostly with old ideas, deadline
is February 19th (Friday).
* Bulidbots will be on maintenance 16 February, Tuesday.
* 2.92 bcon4 on 17 February.
   - We will go back to using release_candidate tags.
   - High frequency tablet input will be removed since it introduced many
problems for old drivers, but will come back in 2.93.
* 2.93 bcon2 on 17 February.
* Python 3.9 support has landed for 2.93 alpha.
   - This has ended Blender support for Windows 7 and 8.
   - The new minimum requirement is Windows 8.1.

Have a great week everyone,
-Dalai-

Dalai Felinto - da...@blender.org - www.blender.org
Blender Development Coordinator
Buikslotermeerplein 161, 1025 ET Amsterdam, the Netherlands
___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

[Bf-committers] Blender developer meeting notes - 2021.01.11

[Bastien Montagne via Bf-committers]

Hi,

Notes for meeting of Monday, 11 January 2021. 11:00 CET / UTC 10:00 on 
[#blender-coders](https://blender.chat/channel/blender-coders) on 
blender.chat.


# Announcements

## Corrective Blender 2.91.1 Release

It is schedule for this Wednesday 13th. Jeroen Bakker will handle the 
release, in coordination with Dalai Felinto.


The [list of commits](https://developer.blender.org/T83216) is growing a 
little bit too much... Probably needs some review pass?


## Blender 2.92

BCon3 for 2.92 release should happen this week on Wednesday 13th. Dalai 
Felinto will go over the 2.92 tasks, but so far there are still a lot of 
open ones for features, missing icons, etc.


All developers are encouraged to go over the workboard and address or 
re-assign tasks to next 2.93 release (as a reminder, after BCon3 we 
should only have bug tasks tagged for 2.92).


Things like missing icons must be tackled, otherwise we'll have to 
revert corresponding features.


Also Asset Browser and Geometry Nodes will need to be evaluated to check 
if they are ready. Dalai Felinto will coordinate final decisions there 
in next two days.
* Julian Eisel would rather hide Assets Browser in the 'experimental 
features' for 2.92 release, it needs a lot more polishing, fixing, and 
even some design decisions may need to be re-evaluated.
* Jacques Lucke notes that the Geometry Nodes sprint planning is 
postponed to Tuesday 12th. Status for 2.92 will be evaluated there.


# Google Summer of Code 2021

Application for organizations [opens on January 
29th](https://summerofcode.withgoogle.com/how-it-works/), but all 
developpers are already welcomed to update the [ideas 
page](https://wiki.blender.org/wiki/GSoC/Ideas_Suggestions).


Cheers,
Bastien

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

[Bf-committers] Blender developer meeting notes - 2021.01.04

[Bastien Montagne via Bf-committers]

Hi,

Notes for meeting of Monday, 04 January 2021. 18:00 CET / UTC 17:00 on 
#blender-coders 8 on blender.chat.


Another quiet meeting, the team is just getting out of the Christmas 
holidays.



Announcements


  *  Happy New Year to everyone!
  * This week is the first bug sprint of 2.92 release cycle

Blender 2.92

  * Next week we switch to BCon3.
  * Julian Eisel is considering to make the asset browser an 
experimental feature for 2.92, he feels it needs too much polishing 
still to be ready in time. Final decision to be made next week.


Cheers,
Bastien

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

[Bf-committers] Blender developer meeting notes - 2020.12.28

[Bastien Montagne via Bf-committers]

Hi,


Here are the notes from today's developer meeting. Next meeting is 
Monday, 04 January 18:00 CET / 17:00 UTC, in #blender-coders on 
blender.chat.


For the complete report read it on: 
https://devtalk.blender.org/t/28-december-2020/16728


Announcements
==

Was a very short meeting, nothing really to announce.

Just a reminder that there are still two weeks to polish new features in 
2.92, before we switch to BCon3 ‘bugfix only’ on January 13th.


See you all next year!


Cheers,
Bastien

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

[Bf-committers] Blender developer meeting notes - 2020.12.21

[Bastien Montagne via Bf-committers]

Hi,


Here are the notes from today's developer meeting. Next meeting is 
Monday, 28 December 11:00 CET / 10:00 UTC, in #blender-coders on 
blender.chat.


For the complete report read it on: 
https://devtalk.blender.org/t/21-december-2020/16652


Announcements
==

Nothing exciting this week, most developers are on holidays anyway.

* Possible Blender 2.91.1 corrective release remains on hold for now, we 
do have quiet a list of potential fixes 
, final decision will be taken 
early next year.
* We did switch to BCon2 for Blender 2.92 release last week, as 
scheduled. This means only polishing and bugfixing is expected in master 
now.


Happy Christmas to everybody!

Cheers,
Bastien

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] Test mail, please disregard

[Bastien Montagne via Bf-committers]

Test answer :)

On 12/8/20 7:49 PM, Dan McGrath via Bf-committers wrote:

Hi,

Sorry for the spam, but there is a report of a user that they are not able
to send mail to the list. There may be several test messages from people,
if needed, so apologies for any inconvenience!


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] Proposing a unique ID for Blender objects system, for use with game engines.

[Bastien Montagne via Bf-committers]

er.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


--
--
Bastien Montagne - bast...@blender.org
Blender developer

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] Proposing a unique ID for Blender objects system, for use with game engines.

[Bastien Montagne via Bf-committers]

Hi,

After talking with Brecht we agreed that having optional UUIDs for our 
data-blocks would be 'nice to have'. A design task was created for that:


https://developer.blender.org/T83019

We do not have currently any developer available to work on this 
project, but we would of course welcome a patch implementing this proposal.


Cheers,
Bastien

On 11/16/20 8:00 PM, Brecht Van Lommel via Bf-committers wrote:

I can see how this would solve a real problem and improves usability when
exporting assets to Godot.

Note that USD explicitly chose not to use UUIDs. But I can see how this
makes more sense for simpler pipleines that don't follow more strict naming
conventions or fix up names afterwards.
https://graphics.pixar.com/usd/docs/index.html#IntroductiontoUSD-NoGUIDS

To me a UUID makes sense when you want to make a connection between two
completely different databases. Like Blender and a game engine, or an asset
manager that manages data from multiple applications. Any time you have to
do that kind of syncing and no longer have a single source of truth, it's
not an ideal situation in the first place, but UUIDs do help.

It can be misused as well. For example I've heard requests for this so
add-ons can store relations to Blender datablocks at runtime, or saved in
.blend files. To me that would be a mistake, as references to datablock
should be done explicitly with pointers that are managed by Blender, that
can be properly referenced counted, cleared, replaced, etc. Also for
library linking datablocks between .blend files this is tempting, but again
it also comes with it own set of issues.

If this were to be implemented, it does raise some questions:
* Would we want to do this for every datablock? Presumably not because the
memory overhead and cost of generating a UUID, so I guess it would be
something that is generated on demand.
* Are UUIDs supposed to be unique within one .blend file, or globally
unique across all .blend files? What happens when you copy or rename a
.blend file, do the UUIDs change?
* Do overrides copy the UUID or generate a new one? I'm guessing it should
generate a new one.
* What about datablocks that are the result of geometry nodes evaluation?
How does this UUID remain stable if geometry nodes can output an arbitrary
number of objects, that might even vary over time?
* How does this relate to the asset manager design? There was some
discussion of having UUIDs for that though no conclusion. If it is needed
there, would that UUID be the same?




On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 5:24 PM Juan Linietsky via Bf-committers <
bf-committers@blender.org> wrote:


Hi guys, lead Godot dev here.

I wanted to discuss with you a problem we are often having that I am not
certain how it can be solved entirely from our side, I add a proposal for
this, but if you guys have a better recommendation, I'm very open to any
ideas.

Basically, Godot will import scenes (GLTF/FBX/DAE/etc) as they come from
blender, and it generates the same object names, resource names, etc. as
they come from Blender and the resource file.

We use the same names so we can keep track of changes in the Blend file. If
an object is moved, a material is changed, etc. we detect on re-import and
everything is updated in Godot.

This is especially more annoying in Godot than in other game engines,
because Godot can read the whole Blender scene and keep it more or less
intact, so users love using this for level design workflow (so they can
design levels in Blender).

So, the problem is that it often happens that for some reason, artists want
to rename the objects in Blender. Be it because they didn't care at the
beginning and they want to become more organized later, or because the
scene became bigger and they need to make their naming of things more
precise to navigate it around. In this situation, when something is renamed
on the Blender side and re-exported, the game engines have no idea where
this object went, so we need to either remove it (resulting in loss data)
it or orphan it (resulting in duplicated data).

While I do think that good practices solve this and this is probably not
such an issue in a professional environment, truth is that game development
has become a huge hobbyist activity, and our users find this situation
constantly and are annoyed with it, and there is nothing we can do from our
side.

The obvious proposal to solve this would be to ask Blender whether it's
possible to generate a unique object ID (UUID?) and make sure it does not
change over time even if objects are renamed, then changing the exporters a
bit to (optionally if selected in the export settings) add this information
as extensions in the existing format (on GLTF it should be rather easy).

If you guys think this is possible, it would be very helpful for us, if you
have other ideas on how we could solve this, we are very open to
discussion.

Best

Juan
___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org

Re: [Bf-committers] 2.92 dates revised

[Bastien Montagne via Bf-committers]

Looks good to me. :)

On 11/3/20 12:45 PM, Dalai Felinto via Bf-committers wrote:

Hi,

I was double-checking the dates for 2.92 [1] and for some reason the
dates were off by one month (bcon1 was 1 month shorter).

I think it was simply an oversight on my end when I calculated the
dates. That said I think bcon1 for 2.92 should be a week shorter, to
make the release dates to fall in Feb-Jun-Aug-Nov.

The adjusted proposed dates are:

2.92
* bcon1: Oct 21, 2020
* bcon2: Dec 16, 2020
* bcon3: Jan 13, 2021
* bcon4: Feb 17, 2021
* bcon5/release: Feb 24, 2021
--
* bug sprint: 4 - 8 Jan, 2021
* bug sprint: 25 - 29 Jan, 2021

[1] - https://developer.blender.org/project/manage/119/

Regards,
-Dalai-

Dalai Felinto - da...@blender.org - www.blender.org
Blender Development Coordinator
Buikslotermeerplein 161, 1025 ET Amsterdam, the Netherlands
___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] Monday meetings - feedback wanted

[Bastien Montagne via Bf-committers]

Hi,

Forgot to answer to that mail… But I essentially agree with the proposal 
to make them on a need-to-have basis. Meetings should be useful, 
otherwise they are loss of time, and indeed those Monday meetings have 
had less and less presence/activities in the recent years.


Think we'd need more than one meeting per release cycle though (maybe 
one before entering a new bcon, to ensure there is no critical thing 
being overlooked ?).


The weekly notes page & mail should remain of course.

Cheers,
Bastien

On 9/28/20 7:10 PM, Dalai Felinto via Bf-committers wrote:

Hi,

The Monday meetings have been mostly single-sided and a bit of a formality.

At the moment most activity happens close to the releases, when
official decisions are formalized:

* Release dates
* Features that are ready or should be postponed
* Corrective releases

I propose the meeting to focus on release only and to be on a
need-to-have basis (once every release cycle probably). Perhaps even
as a video call. The meetings will always be open to anyone.

Module specific topics can be presented and decided in the module
meetings. The reports (announcements, what happened this week and
developers reports) would still be posted online every week.

Looking forward to hearing from the community, in particular the
people that have been attending the meetings in the past.

-Dalai-

Dalai Felinto - da...@blender.org - www.blender.org
Blender Development Coordinator
Buikslotermeerplein 161, 1025 ET Amsterdam, the Netherlands
___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] Blender 2.91 bcon2

[Bastien Montagne via Bf-committers]

Hi, and thanks.

Can we already create the 2.92 project as well? Since it means some 
tasks already need to be (re)scheduled for that release…


Cheers,
Bastien

On 9/18/20 9:41 PM, Dalai Felinto via Bf-committers wrote:

Hi,
We are now officially in 2.91 bcon2 [1].

"Work to improve, optimize and fix bugs in new and existing features. Only
smaller and less risky changes should be made in this phase."

This was delayed one day due to some hiccups on updating some libraries
that are required for the grease pencil patch. I wrote this in the 2.91
"Incidents" column. Later with the proper time we can see what we can do to
address this better in the future.

[1] - https://wiki.blender.org/wiki/Process/Release_Cycle
[2] - https://developer.blender.org/T80830

Regards,
-Dalai-

Dalai Felinto - da...@blender.org - www.blender.org
Blender Development Coordinator
Buikslotermeerplein 161, 1025 ET Amsterdam, the Netherlands
___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

[Bf-committers] Policies about patches modifying third-parties libraries.

[Bastien Montagne via Bf-committers]

Hi,

Under build_files/build_environment/patches we have a bunch of small 
patches for the libraries we build using make deps. Most of them are 
about fixing builds for some platform or architecture, which is a bit 
annoying but acceptable imho.


However, today I discovered that Blender cannot be built with vanilla 
USD library, at all. The patch used on this library adds some new 
function to its API, which (hack over hack) is not even declared in its 
headers, but in Blender code itself.


I would very much like to propose to strictly forbid such dirty 
practices, which violate completely the very idea of libraries, 
especially on OSs like linux, where distributions try very hard to only 
use dynamically linked shared libraries.


Any library that would need that kind of modifications should be put in 
extern/, and explicitly built as part of Blender itself. Or at the very 
least, we should explicitly maintain our own 'fork' of it, with requests 
to the main repo/maintainers to integrate our changes or otherwise 
propose a solution to the problem.


But I do hope there are ways to avoid such ugly changes anyway?

Cheers,
Bastien


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] 8GB of RAM insufficient for bulding Blender

[Bastien Montagne]

There's also another solution, using ninja builder instead of make one 
(ninja should be easy to install from your distro's packages).


Once installed, you need to generate a CMake build, specifying ninja as 
builder (instead of the default, make option), and enabling  
WITH_NINJA_POOL_JOBS:


cd my/new/builddir
cmake -G Ninja -D WITH_NINJA_POOL_JOBS=ON path/to/blender/source

You can then try to build and see if that works. If not, you can try to 
tweak the NINJA_MAX_NUM_PARALLEL_ options (e.g. set _LINK_JOBS and 
_COMPILE_HEAVY_JOBS to 1).


Those options try to be smart be enabling optimal parallelization for 
regular compile tasks, while enforcing heavy ones (and linking, which 
also eats a lot of RAM) to only run one at a time.


As a side note, it would indeed be interesting to know which module 
actually fails to build with 8GB.


Cheers,
Bastien

On 28/02/2020 09:58, Brecht Van Lommel wrote:

There's a few possible solutions:

* Enable WITH_CYCLES_NATIVE_ONLY and disable
WITH_LIBMV_SCHUR_SPECIALIZATIONS
* If it's running out of memory building a particular module, you can
disable that module in CMake (e.g. WITH_MOD_FLUID, ...). It would be
interesting to know which one.
* As a last resort, you can build with fewer threads.


On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 9:48 AM Deep Majumder
wrote:


Hello everyone,

I am trying to build Blender (from its source on Git) so as to apply for
Google Suumer of Code 2020. However, when the build process (make) reaches
to 57%, the whole of my 8 GB RAM is consumed and my system starts thrashing
(eventually the build process gets killed). I am using Pop OS 19.10 64-bit
(which is based on Ubuntu 19.10 Eoan Ermine 64-bit), on an Intel Core i5
8th Gen processor, 8gb of RAM, and 4 GB of swap space on a 7200 rpm HDD.
Is there a workaround this or do I need to buy more RAM?

Regards,
Deep
___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] Blender developer meeting notes - 2020.2.24

[Bastien Montagne]

On 24/02/2020 11:57, Dalai Felinto wrote:

2.82

* Campbell Barton suggests two fixes could make into an eventual 2.82a release:
  * T73898: UDIM crash changing form tiled to single rBd6977b5
  * T73862: Fluid Sim file handle resource leak rB60890cc
* Developers to keep an eye on the tracker to see if there are more of
these (fixes or reports).


I would add (from this morning, 100% safe and kinda very bad, although 
not critical):


* Fix T74003: Autocomplete bug with mesh.loop_triangles. in Blender 
Python Console rB69c587888b5



___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] OSL / LLVM / Freetype library updates.

[Bastien Montagne]

install_deps has been updated.

Cheers,
Bastien

On 08/02/2020 22:32, Ray Molenkamp wrote:

Fellow Platform devs,

Due to various issues in several of the dependencies some of them
have been bumped to new versions.

OSL 1.10.9 / LLVM 9.0.1 - D6744
FreeType 2.10.1 - D6645

Please update these libraries for *Master only*, 2.82 will ship
with the old versions!

You may see SVN commits from me for other dependencies (oidn, libxml)
these are just windows build fixes in the current versions, no versions
are changed, no action is required for the linux/mac platforms.

Greetings,
Ray

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] Moving to bcon3 in a couple of hours.

[Bastien Montagne]

Hey nathan,

Regarding the Start_New_Release_Cycle page, I think there are a couple 
of hickups in that bcon 3 documentation? Namely:


* Missing creating release branch for tools|(||rBDT /source/tools).
|* AFAIK we still do not release contrib addons, so why create a release 
branch for that repo? Or is that necessary to help with scripts 
(building or releasing ones)? If so, noting that in the page would avoid 
confusion. ;)


Cheers,
Bastien


On 09/01/2020 18:36, Nathan 'jesterKing' Letwory wrote:

Hey all,

We're preparing to move to bcon3. I'll be going through
the motions as written in the new release cycle check-
list [1].

Once completed and actually pushed I'll be notifying the
list again.

But to refresh your memories upfront, the stabilizing
branch will be called blender-v2.82-release .

Review the document detailing how to use the branch [2]
so you know how to get your fixes in.

Regards,

/Nathan Letwory




[1] 
https://wiki.blender.org/wiki/Process/Release_Checklist#Start_New_Release_Cycle
[2] https://wiki.blender.org/wiki/Process/Using_Stabilizing_Branch
___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] Moving to Python-3.8

[Bastien Montagne]

TL;DR Am all for switching to python 3.8 in Blender 2.82.

TBH I would not be too much concerned about that VFX reference thing, 
waiting over ten years until a deprecated technology is finally 
officially not supported anymore to switch to a new, modern one sounds 
like a joke to me, especially in an industry that is always supposed to 
be at the tip of progress in techs!


And as Sybren said, py3.8 will support all of py3.7 features, so just 
write your code for 3.7 if you really want to stick to that 'industry 
standard' thing.


Bastien

On 05/11/2019 22:33, dr. Sybren A. Stüvel wrote:

On 05/11/2019 21:31, Luciano A. Muñoz Sessarego wrote:

I honestly would stick to the VFX reference one, yesterday daniel bysted
made a point about it on twitter:
https://twitter.com/3DBystedt/status/1191527352012070912

It looks like his point was that things are easier now that the VFX
Reference Platform is no longer on an ancient version of Python.

Compared to supporting Python 2 and 3 in one script (which is also
doable, but not fun), it'll be peanuts to just write pipeline tools for
Python 3.7 and have them run on 3.8 as well.

Sybren




___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] Committing fixes for releases in stabilizing branch.

[Bastien Montagne]

thanks.

On 11/10/2019 21:53, Brecht Van Lommel wrote:

* Announcement email sent
* source/tools now has blender-v2.81-release
* Autoclose on release branch hopefully fixed, but it might not
retroactively close tasks that were fixed already.
That last point still needs some work I think? Did not have the 
opportunity to try in main repo, but commit 
https://developer.blender.org/rBA2476c0b4b2789e65f1ef95989d4e42dfd784be45 
on addons should have shown on https://developer.blender.org/T69554, 
still no sign of it there after 2 hours…


We accidentally had a merge of master into the release branch. I reverted
that now, but we should add code on git.blender.org to prevent this.


On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 8:25 PM Bastien Montagne 
wrote:


Also, looks like phabricator needs some tweaking, it’s not catching bug
fixes and other phab object references from commits to the release
branch (e.g.
https://developer.blender.org/rB1e5e65fa9f142440689c474dd6d924ab884c7efb
for https://developer.blender.org/T70695).

I know phab is sometimes slow to parse commits in new/quiet branches,
but after 1h30 I think there is something else at play here. ;)

On 11/10/2019 18:45, Bastien Montagne wrote:

This has been very badly communicated so far! This mail is fine as
"preparation", "warning" one.

But now the branch has actually be created, without **any** message
here? Seriously? We need an official "We entered BCon3 NOW, branch
blender-v2.81-release has been created, all bug fixes whould now go to
that branch" type of mail!

Also, the tools sub-repo did not get its blender-v2.81-release branch,
when it had one for 2.78, 2.79 and 2.80, any reason to break things here?

The process is already pretty confusing, if communication is not
handled properly we are going to get some really hectic moments…

Confused cheers,
Bastien

On 10/10/2019 09:34, Nathan 'jesterKing' Letwory wrote:

Hey all,

Soon the stabilizing branches will be created. While not much will
change, but there are a couple of things to keep in mind.

Any bug fix planned for the upcoming release should go to the
corresponding branch (e.g. `blender-v2.81-release`), followed by a
merge to `master`.

Take your time to verify your fixes are correct and the commits look
good (as per usual).

More detailed guidelines can be found on the wiki at:
https://wiki.blender.org/wiki/Process/Using_Stabilizing_Branch

There will be a message to this list once the stabilizing branches
have been created.

Cheers,

/Nathan
___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] Committing fixes for releases in stabilizing branch.

[Bastien Montagne]

Also, looks like phabricator needs some tweaking, it’s not catching bug 
fixes and other phab object references from commits to the release 
branch (e.g. 
https://developer.blender.org/rB1e5e65fa9f142440689c474dd6d924ab884c7efb 
for https://developer.blender.org/T70695).


I know phab is sometimes slow to parse commits in new/quiet branches, 
but after 1h30 I think there is something else at play here. ;)


On 11/10/2019 18:45, Bastien Montagne wrote:
This has been very badly communicated so far! This mail is fine as 
"preparation", "warning" one.


But now the branch has actually be created, without **any** message 
here? Seriously? We need an official "We entered BCon3 NOW, branch 
blender-v2.81-release has been created, all bug fixes whould now go to 
that branch" type of mail!


Also, the tools sub-repo did not get its blender-v2.81-release branch, 
when it had one for 2.78, 2.79 and 2.80, any reason to break things here?


The process is already pretty confusing, if communication is not 
handled properly we are going to get some really hectic moments…


Confused cheers,
Bastien

On 10/10/2019 09:34, Nathan 'jesterKing' Letwory wrote:

Hey all,

Soon the stabilizing branches will be created. While not much will
change, but there are a couple of things to keep in mind.

Any bug fix planned for the upcoming release should go to the
corresponding branch (e.g. `blender-v2.81-release`), followed by a
merge to `master`.

Take your time to verify your fixes are correct and the commits look
good (as per usual).

More detailed guidelines can be found on the wiki at:
https://wiki.blender.org/wiki/Process/Using_Stabilizing_Branch

There will be a message to this list once the stabilizing branches
have been created.

Cheers,

/Nathan
___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] Committing fixes for releases in stabilizing branch.

[Bastien Montagne]

This has been very badly communicated so far! This mail is fine as 
"preparation", "warning" one.


But now the branch has actually be created, without **any** message 
here? Seriously? We need an official "We entered BCon3 NOW, branch 
blender-v2.81-release has been created, all bug fixes whould now go to 
that branch" type of mail!


Also, the tools sub-repo did not get its blender-v2.81-release branch, 
when it had one for 2.78, 2.79 and 2.80, any reason to break things here?


The process is already pretty confusing, if communication is not handled 
properly we are going to get some really hectic moments…


Confused cheers,
Bastien

On 10/10/2019 09:34, Nathan 'jesterKing' Letwory wrote:

Hey all,

Soon the stabilizing branches will be created. While not much will
change, but there are a couple of things to keep in mind.

Any bug fix planned for the upcoming release should go to the
corresponding branch (e.g. `blender-v2.81-release`), followed by a
merge to `master`.

Take your time to verify your fixes are correct and the commits look
good (as per usual).

More detailed guidelines can be found on the wiki at:
https://wiki.blender.org/wiki/Process/Using_Stabilizing_Branch

There will be a message to this list once the stabilizing branches
have been created.

Cheers,

/Nathan
___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] Blender SK translation

[Bastien Montagne]

Hi Andrej,

That’s great news. :)

Ideally, since Blender is an ever-evolving package, you or your 
father-in-law could become part of the Translations project [1], then 
you could commit and keep updating the Slovak translation (the whole 
process is detailed in links from that main page).


Note that there are plans currently to get a proper web interface for 
Blender translations, that would be easier to use for translators, so if 
you think current process is too heavy for you, please just send me the 
.po file indeed, I can always commit it on your behalf for the time being.


Cheers,
Bastien

[1] https://developer.blender.org/project/view/4/

On 27/09/2019 11:23, Advertplus wrote:

Hello,

my father-in-law translated Blender to slovak language and he wants to
provide it to the blender community. Can you please give me an advice
how to do it? Should I send you translation *.po file?

Best regards

Andrej Kovac


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] Release cycle 2.81: dates and branch proposal

[Bastien Montagne]

As already said by others, Blender is not a library. We have always 
tried as hard as possible not to break its API, but this is not, and 
imho should never be, a *hard* goal, at any point of the release 
process. Sanity of code and user experience are more important than API 
stability.


That being said, all this sounds like a heavily theoritical discussion 
to me, besides areas that are in heavy development, afaik breakage in 
our API are *very* rare… Especially outside of 'critical' cases. We even 
have several extra handling in RNA to ensure that (especially when it 
comes to RNA functions).


The only area that could need some work/enhancement/precision imho is 
how we handle deprecation within 'minor' releases cycles (when we want 
to remove something to expose it in another, 'better' way, we usually 
keep the old API for some time, but I don’t think we have any formal 
defined handling for those cases currently?).


On 15/08/2019 15:26, Brian Savery wrote:

First of all, Kudos for the 2.80 release, and I think the move to higher
frequency smaller releases with 2.81 is great.

One thing that I have not seen discussed with this release cycle change is
the python api and addons.

Currently, as things stand, a user would have to reinstall all addons with
each new release between 2.80 and 2.81, which is fine with older release
cadence, but becomes slightly more burdensome with quarterly-ish releases.

Furthermore, what about api compatibility and python compatibility between
releases?  Has there been a discussion about that?  As an addon developer,
I feel the 2.80 release was a bit late breaking some apis (especially for
render engines) and would prefer not to see that repeated with each 2.XX
release.  Us addon developers would prefer to no have to put out a version
for each quarterly release if possible (but this might be selfish a bit on
our part).

This is all further complicated if an addon uses c extensions that need to
be compiled against a certain python version, and that python version
changes between Blender versions.  Overall, this might be one more vote
towards moving to a version scheme like 2.8.1 where api and python version
is stable across minor versions.

Anyway like I said I haven't seen this point brought up.  If there's a
discussion somewhere I could contribute to, please point me there!

Brian
___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] BF coordination meeting notes - 2019.08.19

[Bastien Montagne]

Hey, just a note about automated processes: would be great if automated 
building could also handle API doc generation (in addition to i18n 
stuff)... Might also help catching breakages sooner (currently fighting 
'something' that during last week broke the docs building for me...).


On 19/08/2019 14:45, Nathan 'jesterKing' Letwory wrote:

Hi all,


Here are the notes for our private weekly meeting concerning

the development coordination.


If you have any topics to discuss for next meeting please

be in touch with me or Dalai via mail or on blender.chat


Participants: Brecht Van Lommel, Dalai Felinto, Nathan Letwory

August 19th, 2019.


Topics

--


* Onboarding

+ regular devs should try to give possibility to update proposed patch

+ devs can contact Nathan if they don’t have time to manage closely

   patch review process for code by new devs (i.e. may require lots

   of going back and forth between contributor and dev)

+ tricky to find a good balance between guiding and being able to

   do own work


Phabricator "project" for coordination projects

-

* Added to "Platforms, Builds & Tests" - T66306


Priorities for development infrastructure



* Improve Phabricator ( see i.e. https://developer.blender.org/D5521 )

(Nathan)

* Check with Campbell (and later with Sergey - bottleneckers) on what

is taking their time away

* Buildbot management

+ Automate release builds and codesign

+ Automate run tests


Development priority

-


* Dalai & Brecht go over Modules to check

roadmaps & priorities

* Dalai email bf-committers to remind people

to work in tracker


Phabricator projects




* workboard support should list subprojects (Nathan)


Brecht's time

-


* things are going in the right direction, but takes time to free

up even more


Bi-weekly meetings

---


* strict time limit. If issues remain unsolved handle outside meeting

(or extra meeting if need be)

* start this week, Wednesday and Thursday

* work with external animators: through public channels

* animation module owner Sybren - responsible for organizing

flesh out animation module page



Nathan’s week

---


* contact with localisation team wrt Weblate

* onboarding / review policy

* Crashpad integration (server-side)


Brecht's week

--


* lots of code review


Dalai's week

---


* code review (among others outliner gsoc branch)

* module/project proposal

* meetings with different devs and users


Follow-up

---


* phabricator improvements (Nathan)

+ D5521

+ workboard subproject listings

+ automate builds and tests for patches

*  modules cleanup/roadmaps (Dalai) - on hold until

phabricator patching complete


/Nathan
___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] Upgrade Python 3.7.0 to 3.7.4

[Bastien Montagne]

Bumped the numpy version in install_deps.sh script as well (looks like 
the python ver had already been taken care of here).


On 14/08/2019 01:29, Ray Molenkamp wrote:

All,

Took a bit, but the windows libs have been updated, couple of note worthy 
things:

First: After a brief consult with sybren, the site packages have been
updated to the following versions:

IDNA 2.8
CHARDET  3.0.4
URLLIB3  1.25.3
CERTIFI  2019.6.16
REQUESTS 2.22.0
NUMPY    1.17.0

Second : To support running 'make format' without having to be depended
on a system python being installed on windows, the packaging for python
had to be significantly changed. There now is a runnable python in the
lib folder rather than tarballs.

All tests are still passing, so I'm not expecting a whole lot of problems
however if any do show-up because of this change, please let me know asap.

Third: I left the old python packaging in SVN for now so it will not
disturb any branches dependent on the old packaging method, however,
these old versions will be removed in the future, so be sure to merge
master sooner rather than later if you are working in a branch.

Greetings,
Ray
On 2019-08-02 8:55 a.m., dr. Sybren A. Stüvel wrote:

Dear platform maintainers,

I've just modified versions.cmake and install_deps.sh to install the
latest version of Python, namely 3.7.4. Please update the platform
libraries accordingly.

https://developer.blender.org/rB454daf9b6b87d008e66650927109511f1c1befd2

Kind regards,

Sybren



___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] Design process meeting notes - 2019.08.13

[Bastien Montagne]

 Forwarded Message 
Subject:Re: [Bf-committers] Design process meeting notes - 2019.08.13
Date:   Wed, 14 Aug 2019 09:25:20 +0200
From:   Bastien Montagne 
To: Brecht Van Lommel 



Ah OK, thanks for the precision, was wondering a bit what was that 
'design' module… Also think it should not be called that way, UI is one 
half of designing a project, technical/under the hood aspect is the 
other half. If you forget the internal constraints inherited from 
existing code, you can have the best UI/UX design ever, the project will 
likely not success.


On 13/08/2019 22:08, Brecht Van Lommel wrote:

Note we have been calling this the "user interface module", not
"design module". So to be clear, it's not some new module or team.

On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 9:17 PM Dalai Felinto  wrote:

Hi,

We had a meeting today about the design decision process in Blender.
The design module was represented by William and Brecht.

Participants: Brecht Van Lommel, Dalai Felinto, William Reynish
August 13th, 2019

A lot of the points here apply to the other modules as well. But since
the design module spread throughout all Blender is important to also
be the more clear in its communication process.

Quick topics overview
=
* Big picture
* developer.blender.org
* Buttons removal
* Miscellaneous topics

Big picture

The design team helps us define the big picture. And this should
always be properly documented so we can refer back to it. Without
this, changes may be perceived as arbitrary personal preferences.

When it comes to change the user interface to comply to these,
however, the specific modules are to be involved directly as much as
possible.

developer.blender.org
=
The tracker is still the place where all the design is presented.
Though for the design process often chatting is important. It is a
dance where we keep going back and forth between discussing things in
our channels, reporting them back to the tracker, receive feedback
there, and re-iterate.

It is important though to keep the discussions concentrated as much as
possible on the tracker, so they are not lost in blender.chat, emails,
... even if only to summarize what was discussed elsewhere. Though the
more we can have the conversation there, more open it is.

Buttons removal
=
We had recently an episode where the first points here were rushed
through leading to some disagreement on design decisions. This
particular incident was related to the removal of buttons in the video
sequence and text editors.

This was a very isolated episode where the design behind these
decisions wasn't well documented (and reviewed by a broader team).

There is not much to add to this though. The autonomy we delegate to
the modules may lead to surprises like this every now and then.
Considering the sheer volume of the design team workload, I'm actually
surprised these "polemics" don't come up more often. That said we will
keep working to make sure the bigger picture and guidelines are more
clearly communicated and signed of before we go down to the specific
changes.

Miscellaneous topics

Since we were together we got over the short/medium term roadmaps for
the design module and the current state of a few projects.

1. Video Sequence Editor, or, VSE - need a clear usability picture for
the future. [The grease pencil team has a whole task dedicated to
bring storyboarding into VSE, they are planning a meeting on that soon
- T68321]

2. Collections I/O - during 2.80 we had some rough design for
supporting I/O integrated with collections but we need to move this to
the tracker [it is on Dalai's list].

3. Short term projects - Drag multiple objects, ... as the first
project to follow the new module page format with papercuts and all,
the design module has its hands full already.

4. Asset Manager - Bastien (Montagne) is in the institute. He will
meet with Brecht about how to tackle it for future releases.

5. Particles / Everything Nodes - The current goal is to have some of
it in 2.82. The focus is on delivering something solid as a start
point, without getting lost on the project complex scope.

6. UI developer

We once again acknowledged that we still need a dedicated UI
developer. At the moment our UI developers are also our most senior
developers. And we can't afford to fully allocate them for that.

Best regards,
Dalai
___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers



___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] *** SPAM *** Re: Blender 2.80 release, commits to port over

[Bastien Montagne]

Well, thing is that RC's are tested/used by maybe 5 to 10% of our user 
base, at the very most? So as always, we know that we'll get another 
train of reports only when we actually call it 'final' release. Inluding 
some critical ones that would never have been reported with only RC's, 
even if we had done ten of those...


So yes, really think we just have to trace a line, and accept that 2.80 
won't be as mature and stable as 2.7x was. Also, stabilizing/release 
process has been going on for a vry long time now, most of the (if 
not the whole) dev team is somewhat exhausted from it I think, time to 
call it done and go forward!


PS: we *always* tell people reporting bugs to first check with master 
builds anyway. ;)


On 30/07/2019 01:42, Campbell Barton wrote:

Complexity of changes varies, but some are for sure safe
(eg: crash from NULL pointer use or accidentally reversing image
rotation value).

Since there are contributors in different timezones, I would have
imagined at least 12-24 hours between announcing the release and
calling the ahoy, in the in the past IIRC we had longer than 2 hours
for this.

In general, we're being very sloppy with release naming.

The release candidate (RC1) was not a release candidate
(where we consider it a possible candidate for releasing as a stable release).

If we do 2.80 knowing we need to do a 2.80a - we might as well call it RC4.

At that point it's semantics, we can do a release, then tell people
who report bugs to use daily builds.

On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 1:26 AM Brecht Van Lommel
 wrote:

We can't include this many commits, if we add 10 more commits it would
be an RC4.

There will be bugfixes like this every day for months, we have to draw
the line somewhere. The final release should be as close as possible
to RC3, and I don't consider these both critical and safe enough to
include.

On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 4:59 PM Campbell Barton  wrote:

I see I missed the ahoy, feel like we're missing fixes for obvious
errors which we'll just get reports on, heres my list:

0a0e2dd8a2ce002b76d834c621766e8da3f1b678 Fix T67040: Undo crashes after renaming
bfe580642f46539ba85341fa8db451c52afd0cb4 Fix background image rotation
and offset
76dfbee423e8ba886fd72bca7ae9e6f220c59844 Fix T67472: Gizmo overlap
causes cursor to get stuck
ba94aaedba26acc4a43b78ad7fd3552f1dbafc36 Fix T67639: Default cube UVs
are incorrectly arranged
a542f50b51af0167acc55d4cf2b06490a704ce93 Fix T67523: Incorrect UV's
for grid primitive
314891b1c53fa1d037cc181c504635c075ba3d94 Fix T67826: View selected
fails with files from 2.7x
a38759f017fb7e975e56f7121113cb8c8aab843b Fix T67863: Crash pressing
Ctrl +/- in gpencil action editor
34ad6da4a06ef46cd19945f61cc5f968538546a8 Fix T67450: Crash undoing
edit-mode lattice resolution
4fe0fafb875581e4a116db17da6a032fd1749f65 Fix T67548: Camera
background-image ignores shift
453586be06a129eec7498fe7ecac9f7c555e34e6 Fix T67849: Offset after
"Hook to Selected Object"

On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 12:10 AM Brecht Van Lommel
 wrote:

These are the commits ported over to the release branch now.

Blender:
9e24999 Fix T6: Linked rig crashes Blender 2.8 RC3 on File|New.
16bf0b4 Doxygen: update version number
8e1516b Linux: update appdata description

Addons:
92830c7 BlenderKit: fix oauth failing on some connections.
7ecccf1 BlenderKit: fix search ordering - was accidentaly upside down.
cc1f86f Update Online Manual Links
6027fe0 Addon: Discombobulator: Fixed Doodads Menu section broken
fb464b0 Addon: BSurfaces: Fixed select active Annotation




On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 11:19 AM Brecht Van Lommel
 wrote:

Hi all,

Please reply here with commits that should be ported over to the
release branch for 2.80. We plan to cherry-pick the commits at 16:00
CEST today and then make the builds. This is the current list, but I
haven't gone through the logs yet in detail.

Blender:
none

Addons:
92830c7 BlenderKit: fix oauth failing on some connections.
7ecccf1 BlenderKit: fix search ordering - was accidentaly upside down.
cc1f86f Update Online Manual Links

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers



--
- Campbell
___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers




___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] Blender 2.80 Release AHOY

[Bastien Montagne]

Hi,

Py API doc has been updated.

Cheers,
Bastien

On 29/07/2019 16:53, Brecht Van Lommel wrote:

Hi all,

We are ready for the final release build for Blender 2.80.

Information for platform maintainers:

- Build from the blender-v2.80-release branch, SHA
f6cb5f54494e40f0d217c7a1520a14896bd19120
- Addons revision: 4410bd0a9f82aba3422e737f0fae4a916cf6c0c1
- Locale revision: a467f38d0c668083ee3774eb1e9491793ff30d05
- Libraries SVN tag: blender-2.80-release

Suggested name: blender-2.80-.

Tagging will happen soon after all builds are ready.

Thanks,
Brecht.
___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] Blender 2.80 Release Candidate 2 AHOY

[Bastien Montagne]

Hi,

API doc has been updated for RC2 as well.

Cheers,
Bastien

On 18/07/2019 16:58, Brecht Van Lommel wrote:

Hi all,

We are ready for the second Release Candidate for the Blender 2.80 release.

Information for platform maintainers:

- Build from the blender-v2.80-release branch, SHA
38d4483c6a51d70744d5e146dc87f5da8558448d
- Addons revision: 979298511916b25ec97bb22feb1c06cc9fbc86dd
- Locale revision: 6625026f62f492dd677f5f29c68b9d70c96fb34b
- Libraries SVN tag: blender-2.80-release

Suggested name: blender-2.80rc2-.

Put builds to the usual location and let me know when they are ready.
Tagging will happen soon after all builds are ready.

Thanks,
Brecht.
___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

[Bf-committers] UN-subversionned versionning code in release branch (for RC1 of v2.80)

[Bastien Montagne]

Hi devs,

Just noticed that we forgot to properly add a last subversion bump to 
take into account the 'orphanned' versionning code at the end of our 
2.80 doversion monster. ;)


This is not dramatic, but not ideal either, for releases we should have 
everything properly "guarded" by a version number there… will add a line 
to our release checklist about this too.


Cheers,
Bastien

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] Blender 2.80 Release Candidate 1 AHOY

[Bastien Montagne]

Hi,

Yes, it has been the case (mostly) since several months already…

Additional changes are always possible, even breaking ones, but we try 
to avoid them at all cost (i.e. would only happen if we really cannot do 
otherwise, in practice there is *very* little chance to see this happen).


Cheers,
Bastien

On 11/07/2019 12:21, Wu Yiming wrote:

Hi,

Does this mean that bpy of this version is frozen and won't change until the 
next release?

YimingWu

发件人： montagn...@wanadoo.fr
发送时间： 2019年7月11日 下午5:57
收件人： bf-committers@blender.org
回复： bf-committers@blender.org
主题： Re: [Bf-committers] Blender 2.80 Release Candidate 1 AHOY

Hi,

API doc for 2.80 has been uploaded at the usual place.

Cheers,
Bastien

On 10/07/2019 18:16, Sergey Sharybin wrote:

Hi,

We are ready for the first Release Candidate for Blender 2.80 release.

Information for platform maintainers:

- Build from the blender-2.80-release branch, SHA
3fe0c32fae20be4146bfa20fe64f56f5716a132b
- Addons revision: f54338c63ba36cbbe83161c0b3d4d2b1aa01c4a9
- Locale revision: 38e501b4d7a37d2db0f48d47bdb07c57f3fb9a0d
- Libraries SVN tag: blender-2.80-release

Suggested name: blender-2.80rc1-.

Put builds to usual location and let me know when they are ready.
Tagging will happen soon after all builds are ready.

Thanks everybody for the hard work!


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] Blender 2.80 Release Candidate 1 AHOY

[Bastien Montagne]

Hi,

API doc for 2.80 has been uploaded at the usual place.

Cheers,
Bastien

On 10/07/2019 18:16, Sergey Sharybin wrote:

Hi,

We are ready for the first Release Candidate for Blender 2.80 release.

Information for platform maintainers:

- Build from the blender-2.80-release branch, SHA
3fe0c32fae20be4146bfa20fe64f56f5716a132b
- Addons revision: f54338c63ba36cbbe83161c0b3d4d2b1aa01c4a9
- Locale revision: 38e501b4d7a37d2db0f48d47bdb07c57f3fb9a0d
- Libraries SVN tag: blender-2.80-release

Suggested name: blender-2.80rc1-.

Put builds to usual location and let me know when they are ready.
Tagging will happen soon after all builds are ready.

Thanks everybody for the hard work!


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

[Bf-committers] Remainders about changes affecting RNA/API

[Bastien Montagne]

Hey fellow devs,

Please remember to run some grep over the whole code base (including 
add-ons) when doing changes in RNA/API (especially removing something, 
in that case). That would avoid unecessary noise in tracker, we already 
have enough to handle there (see https://developer.blender.org/T61233)… ;)


Cheers,
Bastien

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

[Bf-committers] Fwd: Re: Error after Updates to developer/git/svn/buildbot

[Bastien Montagne]

 Forwarded Message 
Subject: 	Re: [Bf-committers] Error after Updates to 
developer/git/svn/buildbot

Date:   Sat, 2 Feb 2019 22:27:29 +0100
From:   Bastien Montagne 
To: Dan McGrath 



Yep, seems to be working fine again, thanks! :)

On 02/02/2019 22:20, Dan McGrath wrote:

Hey,

Ah, sorry about that! A last minute change I replaced py27-gitsosis with
py36-gitosis. I reverted it to py27 for now. Try again!


Dan

On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 1:58 PM Sergey Sharybin  wrote:


Ah, indeed need to be non-anonymous to see the issue.

Tried to quickly poke the code to convert the octal values to a proper
Python3 notation, and then also needed to tweak exception handling syntax..
But that just opens a bigger rabbit hole to hell: more and more areas of
Gitosis seems to be incompatible with Python3.

Python2 seems to be unavailable on that host anymore. Restoring it probably
is easier/faster.

P.S. I am also not quite sure why we are still on Gitosis and not on
Gitolite. The former is no longer maintained, the latter one is what Linux
distors are providing. So can not expect Gitosis to be ported to Python3.

On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 7:09 PM Bastien Montagne 
wrote:


Can confirm same issue here as well (debian64 testing).

On 02/02/2019 18:36, Ray Molenkamp wrote:

Same issue here,

anonymous usage seems to work

git clone git://git.blender.org/blender.git

works, however authenticated users

git clone g...@git.blender.org:blender.git

fail with the error mentioned earlier

--Ray


On 2/2/2019 10:30 AM, Howard Trickey wrote:

Happens for me too. git pull from origin/master of blender repository


On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 12:14 PM Sergey Sharybin 
Hi,


util.mkdir(p, 0750)

AFAIK, this should be 0o750 for Python3. The code seems to be from
gitsosis, which we use from an upstream.

What is more weird is that for me `git pull` works fine. Does this

still

happen for you? Which exact repo causes the issue?

On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 5:15 PM blendergit 

wrote:

Hi,

Not sure if you have completed the update, but today when I try to

run

“git pull”, I get this:

$ git pull
Traceback (most recent call last):
 File "/usr/local/bin/gitosis-serve", line 11, in 
   load_entry_point('gitosis==0.2', 'console_scripts',

'gitosis-serve')()

 File

"/usr/local/lib/python3.6/site-packages/pkg_resources/__init__.py",

line   487, in load_entry_point
   return get_distribution(dist).load_entry_point(group, name)
 File

"/usr/local/lib/python3.6/site-packages/pkg_resources/__init__.py",

line   2728, in load_entry_point
   return ep.load()
 File

"/usr/local/lib/python3.6/site-packages/pkg_resources/__init__.py",

line   2346, in load
   return self.resolve()
 File

"/usr/local/lib/python3.6/site-packages/pkg_resources/__init__.py",

line   2352, in resolve
   module = __import__(self.module_name, fromlist=['__name__'],

level=0)

 File "/usr/local/lib/python3.6/site-packages/gitosis/serve.py",

line

142

   util.mkdir(p, 0750)
^
SyntaxError: invalid token
fatal: Could not read from remote repository.

Please make sure you have the correct access rights
and the repository exists.

I’m running on Windows 10.

Regards,
Antonio Vázquez

De: Dan McGrath
Enviado: sábado, 2 de febrero de 2019 12:45
Para: bf-blender developers
Asunto: [Bf-committers] Updates to developer/git/svn/buildbot

Hi,

Just a heads up that today I upgraded the following sites to the

latest

2019Q1 ports in FreeBSD:

 - developer.blender.org
 - git.blender.org
 - svn.blender.org
 - builder.blender.org

As well, the Phabricator (developer.b.o) PHP was upgraded from PHP

5.6 to

7.2. Overall the site seems nice and zippy when doing cached pages,

but

otherwise, keep an eye out for horrible stuff!

Also, if it's good, nice! But if it breaks, it wasn't me that

touched

anything, and is all Sergey Sharybin's fault! ><

At some point the host will go down for a FreeBSD upgrade from 11 to

12.

Probably on Monday or so, I will let you know here.


Cheers,

Dan
___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


--
With best regards, Sergey Sharybin
___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

__

Re: [Bf-committers] Error after Updates to developer/git/svn/buildbot

[Bastien Montagne]

Can confirm same issue here as well (debian64 testing).

On 02/02/2019 18:36, Ray Molenkamp wrote:

Same issue here,

anonymous usage seems to work

git clone git://git.blender.org/blender.git

works, however authenticated users

git clone g...@git.blender.org:blender.git

fail with the error mentioned earlier

--Ray


On 2/2/2019 10:30 AM, Howard Trickey wrote:

Happens for me too. git pull from origin/master of blender repository


On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 12:14 PM Sergey Sharybin 
wrote:


Hi,


util.mkdir(p, 0750)

AFAIK, this should be 0o750 for Python3. The code seems to be from
gitsosis, which we use from an upstream.

What is more weird is that for me `git pull` works fine. Does this still
happen for you? Which exact repo causes the issue?

On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 5:15 PM blendergit  wrote:


Hi,

Not sure if you have completed the update, but today when I try to run
“git pull”, I get this:

$ git pull
Traceback (most recent call last):
   File "/usr/local/bin/gitosis-serve", line 11, in 
 load_entry_point('gitosis==0.2', 'console_scripts',

'gitosis-serve')()

   File

"/usr/local/lib/python3.6/site-packages/pkg_resources/__init__.py",

line   487, in load_entry_point
 return get_distribution(dist).load_entry_point(group, name)
   File

"/usr/local/lib/python3.6/site-packages/pkg_resources/__init__.py",

line   2728, in load_entry_point
 return ep.load()
   File

"/usr/local/lib/python3.6/site-packages/pkg_resources/__init__.py",

line   2346, in load
 return self.resolve()
   File

"/usr/local/lib/python3.6/site-packages/pkg_resources/__init__.py",

line   2352, in resolve
 module = __import__(self.module_name, fromlist=['__name__'], level=0)
   File "/usr/local/lib/python3.6/site-packages/gitosis/serve.py", line

142

 util.mkdir(p, 0750)
  ^
SyntaxError: invalid token
fatal: Could not read from remote repository.

Please make sure you have the correct access rights
and the repository exists.

I’m running on Windows 10.

Regards,
Antonio Vázquez

De: Dan McGrath
Enviado: sábado, 2 de febrero de 2019 12:45
Para: bf-blender developers
Asunto: [Bf-committers] Updates to developer/git/svn/buildbot

Hi,

Just a heads up that today I upgraded the following sites to the latest
2019Q1 ports in FreeBSD:

   - developer.blender.org
   - git.blender.org
   - svn.blender.org
   - builder.blender.org

As well, the Phabricator (developer.b.o) PHP was upgraded from PHP 5.6 to
7.2. Overall the site seems nice and zippy when doing cached pages, but
otherwise, keep an eye out for horrible stuff!

Also, if it's good, nice! But if it breaks, it wasn't me that touched
anything, and is all Sergey Sharybin's fault! ><

At some point the host will go down for a FreeBSD upgrade from 11 to 12.
Probably on Monday or so, I will let you know here.


Cheers,

Dan
___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


--
With best regards, Sergey Sharybin
___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] Update openCollada to 1.6.68

[Bastien Montagne]

Done for install_deps. :)

On 05/12/2018 10:54, Gaia Clary wrote:

Hi, Platform maintainers :)

Please update the subversion repository libraries to OpenCollada 1.6-68
This allows us to add support for importing Animation clips.

The Release sources recommended by OpenCollada can be found here:

https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/opencollada-promotion-artifacts/OpenCOLLADA_v1.6.68.zip 



Or if you prefer to go with the git repository, the tagged revision is 
here:


   https://github.com/KhronosGroup/OpenCOLLADA/tree/v1.6.68

The git hash is 6031fa956e1da4bbdd910af3a8f9e924ef0fca7a

Please tell me if anything around the library build needs improvement. 
I then will forward this to the opencollada people :)


cheers,
Gaia
___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] Library updates for Blender 2.8

[Bastien Montagne]

Don’t think we are in urgent hurry here, we can give it a few more weeks 
and see whether 3.7.1 emerges in time for us (would say dead line for 
libs update would be end of September?)



On 03/08/2018 10:57, Sergey Sharybin wrote:

One thing which is raising my attention in 3.7.1 release log is:

- Fixed a performance regression for reading streams with tarfile.

Also, 3.7.1 is planned to be released soon-ish? Their original plan
actually mentions July, not sure what is the updated planning. Are we
really in a hurry for this update?

On Fri, Aug 3, 2018 at 10:46 AM Sybren A. Stüvel  wrote:


On 23/07/2018 19:43, Brecht Van Lommel wrote:

* Python 3.7.0 (or should we wait until there is a 3.7.1 or so with
bugfixes?)

Let's go to 3.7.0, unless somebody already knows of actual bugs that'll
influence our use.

Sybren

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers





___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

[Bf-committers] Blender developers meeting notes - 2018-05-28

[Bastien Montagne]

Hi all,

Here are the notes from today's 16 UTC (18 CET) meeting in 
irc.freenode.net #blendercoders. Reminder: meetings are on Mondays, next 
meeting is 04th June, 08 UTC (10 CET).


1) Blender 2.8 (and code quest!)

- Antonio Vazquez completed requested changes on new GreasePencil 
branch, which is now ready for a final review. There are still some 
issues with Copy-On-Write depsgraph though.


- Ton reports that yesterday (Sunday 28th), there was a meeting with 
Benoit Bolsee (main developer of the original Game Engine). It went 
fantastic, he'll be starting on new "GE" (RTE, Real Time Engine) in 
July. Help, feedback etc. is welcome as usual!


- Extended Code Quest report for last week: 
https://lists.blender.org/pipermail/bf-committers/2018-May/049440.html


2) Google Summer of Code

- Cycles hair shader has an initial working shader, there will be a test 
build.
- Cycles volume project is still at internal changes level, nothing to 
show (Brecht will take some time to help with the design/implementation 
there).
- Cycles many light sampling didn't really start yet because student 
still had exams

- NPR and bevel projects also seems to be making progress..

Weekly reports from the students can be found on the dedicated mailing 
list: https://lists.blender.org/pipermail/soc-2018-dev/


3) New wiki

New wiki has been setup at https://en.blender.org/wiki/Main_Page

It’s goal is much more limited than previous one, basically this is a 
developer/module team members tool to share technical docs. It should 
also have general help info like setting up a new build of blender, some 
code architecture docs, etc.


Moving a subset of old wiki pages is on-going process.

Old wiki shall be locked (made read-only) in a few weeks, proposed date 
is June 15th. That means that developpers (also including GSoC students) 
should request accounts on new wiki if they do not have one already, and 
move their pages there.


Note that once in read-only state, it will still be possible to access 
and copy wiki-markup content of the pages!


Thanks,
Bastien
___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

[Bf-committers] Blender developers meeting notes - 2018-03-19

[Bastien Montagne]

Hi all,

Here are the notes from today's 09 UTC (10 CET) meeting in 
irc.freenode.net #blendercoders.
Reminder: meetings are on Mondays now, next meeting is 26 March, 16 UTC 
(18 CEST).


1) Blender 2.79 'b' release

- Should be done this week, would only contain a handful regression fixes.

2) Blender 2.8 projects

- Campbell Barton finished initial proof-of-concept of multi-object 
editing (see https://developer.blender.org/T54242 ).


- Antonio Vazquez Keeps working on new Grease Pencil in parallel with 
HERO short, which teaser will be released today!


- Weekly reports:
-- Sergey Sharybin: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Nazg-gul/Foundation/2018#Week_328:_12th_-_18th_March
-- Joshua Leung: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Aligorith/Foundation/2018#March_12_-_March_16
-- Dalais Felinto: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Dfelinto/Foundation18#Week_9_.28March_12th_-_16th.29
-- Clément Foucault: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Hypersomniac/Foundation/2018#Week_61:_12th_-_18th_March
-- Campbell Barton: 
http://download.blender.org/ftp/ideasman42/donelist/2018.html#week-365-march-12
-- Bastien Montagne: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Mont29/Foundation/2018#Week_235_-_03.2F10_to_03.2F16


3) GSoC & Other Projects

Blender is in this year again, now is time for students to get in touch 
with the team, deadline for proposals submissions is on 27th of March.


Thanks,
Bastien

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] Do we accept to have infinite recursive RNA layout patterns?

[Bastien Montagne]

FYI, decided to go with a somewhat ugly, but safe and non-API-breaking 
solution for now, see 
https://developer.blender.org/rB0301df40e5b6c51575d7f9013a1a28b901063829


Bastien


On 16/03/2018 15:50, Bastien Montagne wrote:

Hi devs,

So, was investigating a weird issue today found while doing some 
static override tests, and ended up finding the someone, at some era 
lost in the mist of times, had the genius idea of creating a sort of 
infinite recursion in  PointCache RNA struct (defined in 
rna_object_force.c). That is, pointcache owner has a pointer to active 
pointcache, and said active pointcache has a collection of all 
pointcaches from owner's list (since in DNA, PointCache is actually a 
linked list item).


Needless to say that this totally breaks attempt to walk in RNA data, 
since you'll indefinitely dive into recursive versions of point_caches 
collection items (giving RNA paths like that: 
'particle_systems["feathers_big"].point_cache.point_caches[0].point_caches[0].point_caches[0].…').


Before nuking this non-sense away and sanitizing the mess, I thought 
I’d ask if someone remembers any good reason for current RNA 
code/layout there… Since changing that will introduce RNA API breakage 
(though point_cache does not seems to be used by any addon in our 
repositories currently), would also probably only do it in 2.8 branch?


Cheers,
Bastien

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

[Bf-committers] Do we accept to have infinite recursive RNA layout patterns?

[Bastien Montagne]

Hi devs,

So, was investigating a weird issue today found while doing some static 
override tests, and ended up finding the someone, at some era lost in 
the mist of times, had the genius idea of creating a sort of infinite 
recursion in  PointCache RNA struct (defined in rna_object_force.c). 
That is, pointcache owner has a pointer to active pointcache, and said 
active pointcache has a collection of all pointcaches from owner's list 
(since in DNA, PointCache is actually a linked list item).


Needless to say that this totally breaks attempt to walk in RNA data, 
since you'll indefinitely dive into recursive versions of point_caches 
collection items (giving RNA paths like that: 
'particle_systems["feathers_big"].point_cache.point_caches[0].point_caches[0].point_caches[0].…').


Before nuking this non-sense away and sanitizing the mess, I thought I’d 
ask if someone remembers any good reason for current RNA code/layout 
there… Since changing that will introduce RNA API breakage (though 
point_cache does not seems to be used by any addon in our repositories 
currently), would also probably only do it in 2.8 branch?


Cheers,
Bastien

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

[Bf-committers] Blender developers meeting notes - 2018-03-05

[Bastien Montagne]

Hi all,

Here are the notes from today's 09 UTC (10 CET) meeting in 
irc.freenode.net #blendercoders.
Reminder: meetings are on Mondays now, next meeting is 12 March, 17 UTC 
(18 CET).


1) Blender 2.79 'a' release

- Released last week, unfortunately we already have a regression in 'a' 
regarding hard-cut of sequencer’s strips, so we’ll likely need a 'b' 
within a few weeks.


2) Blender 2.8 projects

Not much to report this week, people were doing small fixes etc. mostly, 
we also need some planning for upcoming Code Quest event in April in 
several areas.


- Weekly reports:
-- Sergey Sharybin: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Nazg-gul/Foundation/2018#Week_326:_26th_February_-_4th_March
-- Joshua Leung: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Aligorith/Foundation/2018#February_26_-_March_2
-- Dalais Felinto: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Dfelinto/Foundation18#Week_8_.28February_26th_-_2nd.29
-- Clément Foucault: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Hypersomniac/Foundation/2018#Week_60:_26th_-_4th_March
-- Campbell Barton: 
http://download.blender.org/ftp/ideasman42/donelist/2018.html#week-363-february-26
-- Bastien Montagne: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Mont29/Foundation/2018#Week_233_-_02.2F24_to_03.2F02


3) GSoC & Other Projects

Blender is in this year again, now is time for students to get in touch 
with the team, proposals submissions start on 12th of March.


- Bastien Montagne is finishing review & polishing of 2017’s GSoC on 
normal editing tools buy Rohan Rathi, should be ready for final review 
this week.


Thanks,
Bastien

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

[Bf-committers] Blender developers meeting notes - 2018-02-19

[Bastien Montagne]

Hi all,

Here are the notes from today's 09 UTC (10 CET) meeting in 
irc.freenode.net #blendercoders.
Reminder: meetings are on Mondays now, next meeting is 26 Feb, 17 UTC 
(18 CET).


1) Blender 2.79 'a' release

- We do final release later today.

2) Blender 2.8 projects

- Sergey Sharybin was working on hairs for the Blender Studio.

- Antonio Vazquez as been working on integration of new Grease Pencil 
Objects in render pipeline, including compositor.


- Weekly reports:
-- Sergey Sharybin: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Nazg-gul/Foundation/2018#Week_324:_12th_-_18th_February
-- Joshua Leung: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Aligorith/Foundation/2018#February_12_-_February_16
-- Dalais Felinto: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Dfelinto/Foundation18
-- Clément Foucault: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Hypersomniac/Foundation/2018
-- Campbell Barton: 
http://download.blender.org/ftp/ideasman42/donelist/2018.html
-- Bastien Montagne: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Mont29/Foundation/2018#Week_231_-_02.2F10_to_02.2F16


3) GSoC

Blender is in this year again, now is time for students to get in touch 
with the team, proposals submissions start on 12th of March.


Thanks,
Bastien

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] 2.79a release - proposed list of commits

[Bastien Montagne]

Am sorry, but this is too late to integrate that kind of changes, we are 
about to do final release…



Le 16/02/2018 à 02:16, bjornmose a écrit :

would be nice if T53701 makes it's way to 2.79a

definitely a bug fix! Most people won't see it at all because it is in 
the wide waste lands of soft body self collision


well some users found it and I'd guess they would be happy to see it 
fixed.


Browsing the WEB recently made me aware of how many users really use 
the module ..


GEE! I did hack some primitive physics into it .. looks like 'hacks 
stay longer than hackers'




On 06.01.2018 16:39, Bastien Montagne wrote:

Thanks, done.


Le 03/01/2018 à 14:24, Gaia Clary a écrit :

Maybe we can add

https://developer.blender.org/rB26f98446b17f418a633a1420a491e5ad0b59b988 



I do not know if this change breaks anything. At least i am not 
aware of issues for now. If it really breaks something then users 
can report. Also in case of failure the workaround is simple: The 
user can set the export option manually in the export panel instead 
of relying on Blender to decide what is correct and what not.


cheers,
Gaia


On 03.01.2018 12:36, Bastien Montagne wrote:
For the record, created a phab task to track the release status 
(thanks to Campbell for the suggestion): 
https://developer.blender.org/T53683



Le 27/12/2017 à 12:05, Bastien Montagne a écrit :
So… looks like our list of commits to backport is too long, even 
the ML server does not want to swallow it. :)


Here is the list we gathered, Sergey and I: 
http://pasteall.org/737326


First part are commits we think should be included, please 
double-check yours though.


Second part are commits we should rather not backport, though they 
might be considered. Please check them to see if you really want 
to include some.


You may also suggest other commit of course, just keep in mind 
that we want only fixes, preferably not complex ones unless they 
address some critical issue. Enhancements or new features are only 
possible if they are really dead simple code wise.


Thanks and happy Christmas,
Bastien

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] [GSoC 2018]Project -- Testing for Core Libraries

[Bastien Montagne]

@Ricardo thanks for spotting the broken link, should be fixed now.

Bastien


Le 13/02/2018 à 12:38, Ricardo Nunes a écrit :

https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Dev:Ref/GoogleSummerOfCode/2018/Students
You'll probably want to start there (And especially pay attention to the
application process and the "student manual"-link to google.
(Also side note to anyone at Foundation potentially reading this on the
GSoC18 page the answer the is there guide to building blender points to a
blank document which is probably not intentional..?)

After that you might want to look at
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Dev:Ref/GoogleSummerOfCode/2017 and look
at the proposals and reports of last years projects to get an idea what it
has been like in the past.

2018-02-13 13:26 GMT+02:00 Himanshu Raj :


Hi, I am Himanshu Raj student at National Institute of Technology
Srinagar,India.
  I am  interested in your organisation for GSoC 2018project(Testing
for core Libraries in the Testing Section).I have read the project
description at the page.Can you please help me where to start with and
how should I start contributing to it.
Thank you.
___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers



___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] ?==?utf-8?q? Blender developers meeting notes - 2018-02-12

[Bastien Montagne]

Hi Manuel,

Ah, will check deeper on T53977, but pretty sure a fix won't make it 
into 2.79a, we are way, way too late in release process to accept any 
new change besides dead-safe and sound one-line fixes…


Also, please note that using relocate operator for libs is preferred way 
to do that now, it should have much better handling of libs, and you do 
not even need to save & reload your file!


Cheers,
Bastien


Le 13/02/2018 à 09:24, Manuel Rais a écrit :

Le Lundi, Février 12, 2018 20:01 CET, Bastien Montagne <montagn...@wanadoo.fr> 
a écrit:
  Hi all,1) Blender 2.79 'a' release

- RC build did not show much issues, we shall aim to final release this
week.
  Hi Bastien,
I'm the supervisor (and lead td) on a french animation tvshow (Non-Non by 
Mathieu Auvray) and I got a main issue with libraries linking in this 
production.
I've posted a bug here : https://developer.blender.org/T53977
We have thousands of assets and thousands of shots. All done in Blender :)
So many many connections between them.

I just wanted to know if this bug would be handled by the developers before the 
2.79a release.
I've tried to fix this but my knowledge in C and blender code is too weak :(
Thanks.

--
Manuel Rais
m...@g-lul.com
  
___

Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

[Bf-committers] Blender developers meeting notes - 2018-02-12

[Bastien Montagne]

Hi all,

Here are the notes from today's 17 UTC (18 CET) meeting in 
irc.freenode.net #blendercoders.
Reminder: meetings are on Mondays now, next meeting is 19 Feb, 09 UTC 
(10 CET).


1) Blender 2.79 'a' release

- RC build did not show much issues, we shall aim to final release this 
week.


2) Blender 2.8 projects

Blender Code Quest is announced! https://www.blender.org/2-8/quest/

Goal is to ease the finalization of first Blender 2.8 version buy 
gathering the whole coding team here in Amsterdam for three months this 
Spring.


As for this week:

- Sergey Sharybin reports that most of CoW Depsgraph core work is now 
done, lots of testing, fixing and polishing remains for coming weeks.


- Bastien Montagne is working on polishing asset-engine branch to get it 
ready for blender2.8 merge.


- Weekly reports:
-- Sergey Sharybin: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Nazg-gul/Foundation/2018#Week_323:_5th_-_11th_February
-- Joshua Leung: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Aligorith/Foundation/2018#February_5_-_February_9
-- Dalais Felinto: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Dfelinto/Foundation18#Week_6_.28February_5th_-_9th.29
-- Clément Foucault: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Hypersomniac/Foundation/2018#Week_57:_6th_-_11th_February
-- Campbell Barton: 
http://download.blender.org/ftp/ideasman42/donelist/2018.html#week-360-february-05
-- Bastien Montagne: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Mont29/Foundation/2018#Week_230_-_02.2F03_to_02.2F09


3) GSoC

Blender is accepted in GSoC 2018, 
https://summerofcode.withgoogle.com/organizations/?sp-page=2 !


Students, it’s time to start checking on our ideas page 
(https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Dev:Ref/GoogleSummerOfCode/2018/Ideas), 
and familiarizing with our code base, especially in the areas that might 
interest you. And of course 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Dev:Ref/GoogleSummerOfCode/2018/Students


4) Other Projects

Sergey will update developer.blender.org this week (minor, continuous 
update), as well as our buildbot (much bigger update, lots of things 
changed there).



Thanks,
Bastien

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

[Bf-committers] Blender developers meeting notes - 2018-02-05

[Bastien Montagne]

Hi all,

Here are the notes from today's 09 UTC (10 CET) meeting in 
irc.freenode.net #blendercoders.
Reminder: meetings are on Mondays now, next meeting is 12 Feb, 17 UTC 
(18 CET).


1) Blender 2.79 'a' release

- RC build looks pretty OK so far, a few more regressions were found and 
fixed, Sergey still has to backport a depsgraph fix regarding dupligroup 
on hair, though.


- We can probably do final release next week.

2) Blender 2.8 projects

- Campbell Barton has a WIP object mode patch 
(https://developer.blender.org/D3037).


- Sergey Sharybin was working on getting better handling of scene in new 
CoW depsgraph, and looking into making manipulator to be aware of 
evaluated object state (https://developer.blender.org/D3036).


- Tamito Kajiyama is working on a fix of Freestyle crash in the 2.8 
branch, needs some review (https://developer.blender.org/D3040).


- Weekly reports:
-- Sergey Sharybin: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Nazg-gul/Foundation/2018#Week_322:_29th_January_-_4th_February
-- Joshua Leung: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Aligorith/Foundation/2018#January_29_-_February_2
-- Dalais Felinto: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Dfelinto/Foundation18#Week_5_.28January_29th_-_2nd.29
-- Clément Foucault: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Hypersomniac/Foundation/2018#Week_56:_29th_-_5th_February
-- Campbell Barton: 
http://download.blender.org/ftp/ideasman42/donelist/2018.html#week-359-january-29
-- Bastien Montagne: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Mont29/Foundation/2018#Week_229_-_01.2F27_to_02.2F02


3) GSoC

Not much to say, announcement for accepted organizations in on February 
the 12th.


Thanks,
Bastien
___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] Blender 2.79a Release Candidate AHOY

[Bastien Montagne]

Am sorry, but that kind of changes cannot be considered as totally 
safe/straightforward, which is why they were put in 'to be considered' 
category instead of being backported right away. Devs had over a month 
to check on that public list and say which of their commits they wanted 
to be included.


Now that 2.79aRC has been published, we are much more strict about 
things we backport, only regressions fixes (in 2.79a compared to 2.79) 
and dead simple/obvious one liners are accepted… We can’t drag alone 
with this much longer, this has already taken a tremendous amount of 
time and energy. :/


Bastien


Le 02/02/2018 à 07:33, Joshua Leung a écrit :

While we're at it, all of the NLA/Driver/Breakdowner fixes under the "To be
considered?" section can be included

Joshua

On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 1:03 PM, Gaia Clary <gaia.cl...@machinimatrix.org>
wrote:


i found a nasty mistake in one of my recent fixes where i have
unintentionally commented out 2 lines which now disable Collada animation
export. Please can you consider to add this fix to 2.79a?

rB78a77fe622b8 -- fix: unintentionally commented out collada animation
export

thanks,
Gaia


On 23.01.2018 12:41, Sergey Sharybin wrote:


Hi everyone,

A huge work was done to port crucial fixes (and even more!), and we are
ready for 2.79a Release Candidate now.

Yes, that's right. There are so much things that changed, that we do an
extra steps for corrective release, something we didn't do before.

Full list of changes can be found there:
https://developer.blender.org/T53683
We will work on a better release page shortly.

Information for platform maintainers:

- Build from the blender-2.79a-release branch,
SHA 61335d853d113c827a54ab3b71e357fab2aa507a
- Addons revision: cf60d1ad47622f85d8294609198de482fb8c4f22
- Locale revision: 1bbc9bdabe4ed26c164aef8a43ef39657dc23cfb
- Libraries SVN tag: blender-2.79a-release

Suggested name: blender-2.79a-rc-

Make sure you're using 2.79a tag for libraries.

Put builds to usual location and let me know when they are ready.,

Special thanks to Bastien Montagne for coordinating 2.79a, and everyone
else who invested their time on porting fixes to the branch!



___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers



___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] Blender 2.79a Release Candidate AHOY

[Bastien Montagne]

Eh… for some reason, we don't have same code in 2.79a and master for 
DocumentWriter.cpp, and that issue is not present in 2.79a afaict. Would 
be nice if you could double-check that though. But rB78a77fe622b8 does 
not apply cleanly and is not needed on 2.79a imho.


Bastien


Le 02/02/2018 à 01:03, Gaia Clary a écrit :
i found a nasty mistake in one of my recent fixes where i have 
unintentionally commented out 2 lines which now disable Collada 
animation export. Please can you consider to add this fix to 2.79a?


rB78a77fe622b8 -- fix: unintentionally commented out collada animation 
export


thanks,
Gaia


On 23.01.2018 12:41, Sergey Sharybin wrote:

Hi everyone,

A huge work was done to port crucial fixes (and even more!), and we are
ready for 2.79a Release Candidate now.

Yes, that's right. There are so much things that changed, that we do an
extra steps for corrective release, something we didn't do before.

Full list of changes can be found there:
https://developer.blender.org/T53683
We will work on a better release page shortly.

Information for platform maintainers:

- Build from the blender-2.79a-release branch,
SHA 61335d853d113c827a54ab3b71e357fab2aa507a
- Addons revision: cf60d1ad47622f85d8294609198de482fb8c4f22
- Locale revision: 1bbc9bdabe4ed26c164aef8a43ef39657dc23cfb
- Libraries SVN tag: blender-2.79a-release

Suggested name: blender-2.79a-rc-

Make sure you're using 2.79a tag for libraries.

Put builds to usual location and let me know when they are ready.,

Special thanks to Bastien Montagne for coordinating 2.79a, and everyone
else who invested their time on porting fixes to the branch!



___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers



___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] How to maintain for master and blender2.8 in parallel?

[Bastien Montagne]

When you commit any significant change, it’s best to merge it 
immediately in blender2.8, yes. In case of conflict, better to catch it 
early, and better if the original committer is around to fix it 
correctly. ;)



Le 31/01/2018 à 13:41, Howard Trickey a écrit :

Is the person who committed a change to master also expected to do the
merge of those changes to blender2.8, or do the "several times a day"
merges naturally pick up all changes committed to master recently?

On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 7:02 AM Bastien Montagne <montagn...@wanadoo.fr>
wrote:


Hi Gaia,

You should just commit to master, and then merge master in blender2.8,
that’s how we deal with fixes that should go to both.

In fact, blender2.8 remains totally based on master for now, we do
merges several times a day usually, to ensure it keeps manageable. :)

Cheers,
Bastien


Le 31/01/2018 à 12:53, Gaia Clary a écrit :

Hi;

I would like to apply a few fixes to the master branch and to the
blender2.8 branch in parallel. But i do not know a good way to apply
those fixes in a correct way. Is there a general workflow for this?

I thought of fixing in master, then cherry-pick the commits to
blender2.8 Is that the right way to go? Or do i just do my fixes in
master and blender2.8 separately? Or is there yet another way to do it?

Please can i get an advise?

cheers,
Gaia

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] How to maintain for master and blender2.8 in parallel?

[Bastien Montagne]

Hi Gaia,

You should just commit to master, and then merge master in blender2.8, 
that’s how we deal with fixes that should go to both.


In fact, blender2.8 remains totally based on master for now, we do 
merges several times a day usually, to ensure it keeps manageable. :)


Cheers,
Bastien


Le 31/01/2018 à 12:53, Gaia Clary a écrit :

Hi;

I would like to apply a few fixes to the master branch and to the 
blender2.8 branch in parallel. But i do not know a good way to apply 
those fixes in a correct way. Is there a general workflow for this?


I thought of fixing in master, then cherry-pick the commits to 
blender2.8 Is that the right way to go? Or do i just do my fixes in 
master and blender2.8 separately? Or is there yet another way to do it?


Please can i get an advise?

cheers,
Gaia

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers



___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

[Bf-committers] Blender developers meeting notes - 2018-01-22

[Bastien Montagne]

Hi all,

Here are the notes from today's 09 UTC (10 CET) meeting in 
irc.freenode.net #blendercoders.
Reminder: meetings are on Mondays now, next meeting is 29 Jan, 17 UTC 
(18 CET).


1) Blender 2.79 'a' release

- Looks like we are ready for testbuild, AHOY should happen later today.

2) Blender 2.8 projects

- Dalai Felinto, with help from Pablo Vazquez for UI, added filtering to 
the Outliner, check 
https://developer.blender.org/rB37913cf5326a732cb94c28f96c1deb8f3965c846 
for details.


- UI team is making a call for volunteers to help design new icons 
needed by 2.8 projects, see https://developer.blender.org/T53840.


- Sergey Sharybin was busy getting cameras to work with new CoW depsgraph.

- Weekly reports:
-- Sergey Sharybin: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Nazg-gul/Foundation/2018#Week_320:_15th_-_21st_January
-- Dalais Felinto: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Dfelinto/Foundation18#Week_3_.28January_15th_-_19th.29
-- Clément Foucault: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Hypersomniac/Foundation/2018#Week_54:_15th_-_21st_January
-- Campbell Barton: 
http://download.blender.org/ftp/ideasman42/donelist/2018.html#week-357-january-15
-- Bastien Montagne: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Mont29/Foundation/2018#Week_227_-_01.2F13_to_01.2F19


3) Other Projects

Nothing to mention here this time…

Thanks,
Bastien

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

[Bf-committers] Blender developers meeting notes - 2018-01-15

[Bastien Montagne]

Hi all,

Here are the notes from today's 17 UTC (18 CET) meeting in 
irc.freenode.net #blendercoders.
Reminder: meetings are on Mondays now, next meeting is 22 Jan, 09 UTC 
(10 CET).


1) Blender 2.79 'a' release

- Nothing new since last week, we keep integrating some more fixes though.

- We'd like to include some security fixes, see 
https://developer.blender.org/T52924 for details.


- Goal is again to make a testbuild on Wednesday, hopefully.

2) Blender 2.8 projects

- Clément Foucault kept on bugfixing new Eevee, hopefully he can soon 
return to coding new features.


- Antonio Vazquez reports from Grease Pencil meeting with the team that 
GP still needs some design work for its integration in render process, 
design doc should follow soon.


- Sergey Sharybin has been working on consolidating DEG code further.

- Bastien Montagne kept working on Static Overrides and Asset Engine 
projects, static overrides' design should now be complete (see 
https://developer.blender.org/T53500 and sub-tasks).


- Weekly reports:
-- Sergey Sharybin: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Nazg-gul/Foundation/2018#Week_318:_8th_-_14th_January
-- Dalais Felinto: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Dfelinto/Foundation18#Week_2_.28January_8th_-_12th.29
-- Clément Foucault: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Hypersomniac/Foundation/2018#Week_52:_8th_-_14th_January
-- Campbell Barton: 
http://download.blender.org/ftp/ideasman42/donelist/2018.html#week-356-january-8
-- Bastien Montagne: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Mont29/Foundation/2018#Week_226_-_01.2F06_to_01.2F12


3) Other Projects

- It’s GSoC time again! Organizations submission deadline is on 23rd 
January, we know if Blender is accepted this year three weeks later.


- Suggestion is to keep ideas more conservative/simpler this year, and 
enforce delivery of complete project (including merge into master/2.8) 
by end of coding period.


- Projects should be based on 2.8 branch, not current master (2.7).

Thanks,
Bastien

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

[Bf-committers] Blender developers meeting notes - 2018-01-08

[Bastien Montagne]

Hi all,

Here are the notes from today's 9 UTC (10 CET) meeting in 
irc.freenode.net #blendercoders.
Reminder: meetings are on Mondays now, next meeting is 15 Jan, 17 UTC 
(18 CET).


1) Blender 2.79 'a' release

- Release is going along nicely so far, you can track status on 
https://developer.blender.org/T53683 (for main repo) and 
https://developer.blender.org/T53684 (for addons).


- We need to check recent commits (from 19/12/2017), and finalize 
merging of conflicting ones.


- Goal is to make a testbuild on Wednesday (note that we cannot use 
buildbot for those, because some libraries were updated since 2.79 
release…).


2) Blender 2.8 projects

- Nothing much to report, Christmas holidays… Sergey reports that 
initial tests with new CoW depsgraph seem encouraging though.


- Weekly reports:
-- Sergey was on holidays, still worked a bit on task scheduling 
refactor (better multi-core CPUs handling).
-- Dalais Felinto: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Dfelinto/Foundation18#Week_1_.28January_1st_-_5th.29
-- Clément Foucault: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Hypersomniac/Foundation/2018#Week_52:_1st_-_7th_January
-- Campbell Barton: 
http://download.blender.org/ftp/ideasman42/donelist/2018.html#week-355-january-1
-- Bastien Montagne: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Mont29/Foundation/2018#Week 
225_-_12.2F30_to_01.2F05


Thanks,
Bastien

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] 2.79a release - proposed list of commits

[Bastien Montagne]

Thanks, done.


Le 03/01/2018 à 14:24, Gaia Clary a écrit :

Maybe we can add

https://developer.blender.org/rB26f98446b17f418a633a1420a491e5ad0b59b988

I do not know if this change breaks anything. At least i am not aware 
of issues for now. If it really breaks something then users can 
report. Also in case of failure the workaround is simple: The user can 
set the export option manually in the export panel instead of relying 
on Blender to decide what is correct and what not.


cheers,
Gaia


On 03.01.2018 12:36, Bastien Montagne wrote:
For the record, created a phab task to track the release status 
(thanks to Campbell for the suggestion): 
https://developer.blender.org/T53683



Le 27/12/2017 à 12:05, Bastien Montagne a écrit :
So… looks like our list of commits to backport is too long, even the 
ML server does not want to swallow it. :)


Here is the list we gathered, Sergey and I: http://pasteall.org/737326

First part are commits we think should be included, please 
double-check yours though.


Second part are commits we should rather not backport, though they 
might be considered. Please check them to see if you really want to 
include some.


You may also suggest other commit of course, just keep in mind that 
we want only fixes, preferably not complex ones unless they address 
some critical issue. Enhancements or new features are only possible 
if they are really dead simple code wise.


Thanks and happy Christmas,
Bastien

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] 2.79a release - proposed list of commits

[Bastien Montagne]

For the record, created a phab task to track the release status (thanks 
to Campbell for the suggestion): https://developer.blender.org/T53683



Le 27/12/2017 à 12:05, Bastien Montagne a écrit :
So… looks like our list of commits to backport is too long, even the 
ML server does not want to swallow it. :)


Here is the list we gathered, Sergey and I: http://pasteall.org/737326

First part are commits we think should be included, please 
double-check yours though.


Second part are commits we should rather not backport, though they 
might be considered. Please check them to see if you really want to 
include some.


You may also suggest other commit of course, just keep in mind that we 
want only fixes, preferably not complex ones unless they address some 
critical issue. Enhancements or new features are only possible if they 
are really dead simple code wise.


Thanks and happy Christmas,
Bastien

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] 2.79a release - proposed list of commits

[Bastien Montagne]

Thanks Brecht, updated lists of commits: http://pasteall.org/745702


Le 01/01/2018 à 18:02, Brecht Van Lommel a écrit :

Thanks, I've backported my commits with merge conflicts, and a couple more
that were excluded initially.

On Mon, Jan 1, 2018 at 4:44 PM, Bastien Montagne <montagn...@wanadoo.fr>
wrote:


Hi devs,

Created the branch and backported most of listed commits, a few ones are
not applying cleanly. Please double-check updated list, would be better if
the authors could handle to conflict resolution themthelves. ;)

http://pasteall.org/745656

Thanks and wish you all a happy new Year! :)
Bastien



Le 27/12/2017 à 12:05, Bastien Montagne a écrit :


So… looks like our list of commits to backport is too long, even the ML
server does not want to swallow it. :)

Here is the list we gathered, Sergey and I: http://pasteall.org/737326

First part are commits we think should be included, please double-check
yours though.

Second part are commits we should rather not backport, though they might
be considered. Please check them to see if you really want to include some.

You may also suggest other commit of course, just keep in mind that we
want only fixes, preferably not complex ones unless they address some
critical issue. Enhancements or new features are only possible if they are
really dead simple code wise.

Thanks and happy Christmas,
Bastien

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] 2.79a release - proposed list of commits

[Bastien Montagne]

Hi devs,

Created the branch and backported most of listed commits, a few ones are 
not applying cleanly. Please double-check updated list, would be better 
if the authors could handle to conflict resolution themthelves. ;)


http://pasteall.org/745656

Thanks and wish you all a happy new Year! :)
Bastien


Le 27/12/2017 à 12:05, Bastien Montagne a écrit :
So… looks like our list of commits to backport is too long, even the 
ML server does not want to swallow it. :)


Here is the list we gathered, Sergey and I: http://pasteall.org/737326

First part are commits we think should be included, please 
double-check yours though.


Second part are commits we should rather not backport, though they 
might be considered. Please check them to see if you really want to 
include some.


You may also suggest other commit of course, just keep in mind that we 
want only fixes, preferably not complex ones unless they address some 
critical issue. Enhancements or new features are only possible if they 
are really dead simple code wise.


Thanks and happy Christmas,
Bastien

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] 2.79a release - proposed list of commits

[Bastien Montagne]

Thanks, done.


Le 29/12/2017 à 14:29, Campbell Barton a écrit :

Hi, from own 'maybe' commits, +1 for all except two:

Changes to boolean ended up having multiple commits afterwards which
probably won't apply cleanly.
The current state in master is good AFAICS, however the changes needed
might be too intrusive for a point release.

Exclude:

rB892d304ded   2017/09/14   Campbell Barton  Fix
T52291: Boolean fails w/ co-linear edged ngons
rBfdb8e17936   2017/09/15   Campbell Barton  Fix error
in recent boolean changes w/ quad split



All good:

rBf56fea3d6b   2017/09/11   Campbell Barton  Fix
T52701: Mesh shortest path fails at boundaries
rB8c21003248   2017/09/14   Campbell Barton  Fix
T52748: Select shortest face path fails
rBfc7ac0bc49   2017/09/14   Campbell Barton  Correct
error in last commit
rB7c8e87fc52   2017/09/15   Campbell Barton  Fix
T52384: Bridge pair result depends on other loops
rBa850d74312   2017/09/16   Campbell Barton  Fix
T51074: Boolean modifier inverts operation
rB9a2f7dd77b   2017/09/19   Campbell Barton  Correct
recent error in boolean quad split check
rB2103194f79   2017/10/25   Campbell Barton  Fix
T53004: XWayland ignores cursor-warp calls
rBed3b7a5cd4   2017/11/20   Campbell Barton  Fix
T53342: Outliner 'select hierarchy' broken
rB1f95347882   2017/12/14   Campbell Barton  Fix
T53322: Collada export crash w/ shape keys
rB076616898b   2017/12/18   Campbell Barton  Fix
T53577: Rake sculpt/paint wrong on first step

rBd19d094ca9bCampbell Barton Fix incorrect allocation size



Went over other commits and thing these should be included too:

rB974053f7e Fix brush reset (missing notifier)
rB775c773cf Fix sculpt secondary color missing some brushes
rBb29e37ed8 Docs: add note for bmesh face_split_edgenet
rB8fb2e4619 Edit Mesh: click extrude, ensure inverse matrix
rB3859f5ec2 Docs: correct descriptions
rBc93cfcbb6 Fix edge-split bmesh operator giving empty result
rB8661ab12a Fix BMesh PyAPI internal flag clearing logic
rB136f33b09 Fix T53143: Knife Crash after Grid Fill
rB1d409defb Docs: clarify return value for BVH API
rB69b516590 WM: minor correction to user-pref writing
rB326efb431 Fix T53274: Saving template prefs overwrites default prefs
rB855799ecc Fix T53430: Cut at the strip end fails w/ endstill
rB4a734325f bl_app_override: support empty UI layout items
rB7a58ff928 Math Lib: signed versions of quaternion angle
rBe418c858 3D View: use shortest angle between quaternions

On Wed, Dec 27, 2017 at 10:05 PM, Bastien Montagne
<montagn...@wanadoo.fr> wrote:

So… looks like our list of commits to backport is too long, even the ML
server does not want to swallow it. :)

Here is the list we gathered, Sergey and I: http://pasteall.org/737326

First part are commits we think should be included, please double-check
yours though.

Second part are commits we should rather not backport, though they might be
considered. Please check them to see if you really want to include some.

You may also suggest other commit of course, just keep in mind that we want
only fixes, preferably not complex ones unless they address some critical
issue. Enhancements or new features are only possible if they are really
dead simple code wise.

Thanks and happy Christmas,
Bastien

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers





___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] 2.79a release - proposed list of commits

[Bastien Montagne]

Thanks, done.


Le 27/12/2017 à 16:01, Gaia Clary a écrit :

hi.

I believe this one (Collada - crash during export) should be added: 
rB1f95347882 ( Fix T53322 ) But maybe Campbell should decide.


cheers,
Gaia

On 27.12.2017 12:05, Bastien Montagne wrote:
So… looks like our list of commits to backport is too long, even the 
ML server does not want to swallow it. :)


Here is the list we gathered, Sergey and I: http://pasteall.org/737326

First part are commits we think should be included, please 
double-check yours though.


Second part are commits we should rather not backport, though they 
might be considered. Please check them to see if you really want to 
include some.


You may also suggest other commit of course, just keep in mind that 
we want only fixes, preferably not complex ones unless they address 
some critical issue. Enhancements or new features are only possible 
if they are really dead simple code wise.


Thanks and happy Christmas,
Bastien

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] 2.79a release - proposed list of commits

[Bastien Montagne]

Hey Brecht, and thanks.

Agree with your suggestion, will make things much simpler to manage 
indeed. We could even have that 'fix' branch added to buildbots, that 
way people who want to use stable Blender could benefit from bugfixes 
more easily/immediately too.



Le 28/12/2017 à 18:48, Brecht Van Lommel a écrit :

Hi,

 From the second part of the list, I suggest to include these commits,
especially the first one.

rBd0d9360a66 Fix T52800: fix UI flickering with Mesa on Linux
rB07dbff7dc1dFix T53217: GLSL principled BSDF black with zero clearcoat
roughness.

These additional commits could be added. Especially the last one I consider
important, but there will be a merge conflict so I can backport it myself
once there is a branch.

rB05b08a3   Fix T53092: errors reading EXR files with different
data/display window
rBdebd9f6   Fix T53171: lamp specials strength tweak fails with renamed
emission nodes.
rB948515c   Fix T53600: Cycles shader mixing issue with principled BSDF
and zero weights.

For the future, I suggest we create a bugfix branch after the release, and
let everyone commit the fixes there immediately and then merge that into
master. It really should be each developer's own responsibility, and bugfix
releases would be less disruptive to the development process.

Thanks,
Brecht.


On Wed, Dec 27, 2017 at 4:02 PM, Bastien Montagne <montagn...@wanadoo.fr>
wrote:


I just happen to have finished gathering add-ons commits and send the list
to bf-python ;)



Le 27/12/2017 à 15:52, Julien Duroure a écrit :


Hello,

Seems this list doesn't include addon repo commits.
Is there somewhere a list of commit to backport for addons ?
Thinking about Rigify commits for example.

Cheers,

Julien

On Wed, Dec 27, 2017 at 12:14 PM, Sybren A. Stüvel <syb...@stuvel.eu>
wrote:

On 27/12/17 12:05, Bastien Montagne wrote:

First part are commits we think should be included, please
double-check yours though.
[...] You may also suggest other commit of course, just keep in mind
that we want only fixes


I would like to see this commit in 2.79a too. I think it's a farily safe
fix, but it has been in master only for a few days and over Christmas
holidays, so I'm not sure how many people actually used it.

commit b1a036861ddd08c314587666a028a59bfb049e54
Author: Martin Felke <martin.fe...@googlemail.com>
Date:   Wed Dec 20 10:30:39 2017 +0100

  Fix T53572: Alembic imports UV maps incorrectly



Cheers,

--
Sybren A. Stüvel

https://stuvelfoto.nl/
https://stuvel.eu/


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers





___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] 2.79a release - proposed list of commits

[Bastien Montagne]

I just happen to have finished gathering add-ons commits and send the 
list to bf-python ;)



Le 27/12/2017 à 15:52, Julien Duroure a écrit :

Hello,

Seems this list doesn't include addon repo commits.
Is there somewhere a list of commit to backport for addons ?
Thinking about Rigify commits for example.

Cheers,

Julien

On Wed, Dec 27, 2017 at 12:14 PM, Sybren A. Stüvel <syb...@stuvel.eu> wrote:


On 27/12/17 12:05, Bastien Montagne wrote:

First part are commits we think should be included, please
double-check yours though.
[...] You may also suggest other commit of course, just keep in mind
that we want only fixes

I would like to see this commit in 2.79a too. I think it's a farily safe
fix, but it has been in master only for a few days and over Christmas
holidays, so I'm not sure how many people actually used it.

commit b1a036861ddd08c314587666a028a59bfb049e54
Author: Martin Felke <martin.fe...@googlemail.com>
Date:   Wed Dec 20 10:30:39 2017 +0100

 Fix T53572: Alembic imports UV maps incorrectly



Cheers,

--
Sybren A. Stüvel

https://stuvelfoto.nl/
https://stuvel.eu/


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers






___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

[Bf-committers] 2.79a release - proposed list of commits

[Bastien Montagne]

So… looks like our list of commits to backport is too long, even the ML 
server does not want to swallow it. :)


Here is the list we gathered, Sergey and I: http://pasteall.org/737326

First part are commits we think should be included, please double-check 
yours though.


Second part are commits we should rather not backport, though they might 
be considered. Please check them to see if you really want to include some.


You may also suggest other commit of course, just keep in mind that we 
want only fixes, preferably not complex ones unless they address some 
critical issue. Enhancements or new features are only possible if they 
are really dead simple code wise.


Thanks and happy Christmas,
Bastien

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

[Bf-committers] No IRC for me

[Bastien Montagne]

Hey guys,

Since yesterday 8pm, I cannot connect to freenode at all (getting a 
cryptic "Notice -- You need to identify via SASL to use this server")… 
From some googling, it could be related to recent spambots attacks maybe?


Anyway, just so that you know (and hopping this gets fixed soon).

Cheers,
Bastien

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

[Bf-committers] Blender developers meeting notes - 2017-12-11

[Bastien Montagne]

Hi all,

Here are the notes from today's 9 UTC (10 CET) meeting in 
irc.freenode.net #blendercoders.
Reminder: meetings are on Mondays now, next meeting is 18 Dec, 17 UTC 
(18 CET).


1) Blender 2.79 'a' release

- This has been dragging on for too long, we should do it this week.

- Sergey and Bastien will go over commits in master (and addons), 
prepare list for backport, today.



2) Blender 2.8 projects

- Grease Pencil team keeps working on it and happily using it for Hero 
production, they'll publish a development update in the blog later this 
week.


- Sergey Sharybin "just" made groups and proxies to work. Some Spring 
shots can now be opened and played-back fine in 2.8. A bit slow though, 
COW made it to re-evaluated IDs too much, needs more refined behavior.


- Bastien Montagne worked on various minor tasks related to Asset engine 
and Static override (also some tech docs), at end of week, decided (with 
Dalai) to focus on getting static overrides usable first, before going 
back finishing asset engine stuff.


- As a friendly reminder, BF developers should try to be at those 
meetings, at least once every two weeks, the new timing were defined to 
ensure everybody on Earth will have at least one of them at a decent 
hour… Also, please communicate with the team when you'll not be around 
for whatever reasons (sending a summary of your week's work to be 
included in the notes would be nice too, in that case).


- Weekly reports:
-- Sergey Sharybin: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Nazg-gul/Foundation/2017#Week_314:_4th_-_10th_December
-- Bastien Montagne: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Mont29/Foundation/2017#Week_221_-_12.2F02_to_12.2F08


Thanks,
Bastien

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

[Bf-committers] Blender developers meeting notes - 2017-11-27

[Bastien Montagne]

Hi all,

Here are the notes from today's 9 UTC (10 CET) meeting in 
irc.freenode.net #blendercoders.
Reminder: meetings are on Mondays now, next meeting is 04 Dec, 17 UTC 
(18 CET).


1) Blender 2.79 'a' release

- We shall do it sooner than later, the more we wait, the more painful 
it will be.


- We agree again on sticking to safe or crucial fixes only, enhancements 
may be allowed on exception basis provided they are *very* safe and 
simple changes.


- Sergey and Bastien will go over commits in master (and addons), 
prepare list for backport.



2) Blender 2.8 projects

- Clement Foucault did more SSS progress in Eevee this week, next one 
will be on fixing irradiance grid light leaking. Motion blur is postponed.


- Joshua Leung asks for another round of review on the Grease Pencil branch

- Sergey Sharybin has been working on sanitizing flag and dynamic 
overrides evaluation. Next week he’ll have to solve issues of the whole 
scene evaluation when something is changing when having copy-on-write 
enabled (that would imply adding more granular update tagging, which 
then can be used for tools, and make tools to work!).


- Bastien Montagne hopes to merge static ID override in 2.8, otherwise 
will do some side-track work again as last week (release, removing 
OpenMP, ...).


- Weekly reports:
-- Clement Foucault: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Hypersomniac/Foundation/2017#Week_49:_13th_-_19th_November
-- Sergey Sharybin: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Nazg-gul/Foundation/2017#Week_312:_20th_-_26th_November
-- Bastien Montagne: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php?title=User:Mont29/Foundation/2017#Week_219_-_11.2F18_to_11.2F24


3) Other projects

- Stefan Werner created a branch to finalize his Embree patch for Cycles 
(an alternative ray-tracing kernel, see 
https://developer.blender.org/diffusion/B/history/cycles_embree/).


- Campbell Barton mailed proposal to bf-committers about the Blender 
Development Forum Proposal: 
https://lists.blender.org/pipermail/bf-committers/2017-November/048920.html


Thanks,
Bastien
___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

[Bf-committers] Blender developers meeting notes - 2017-11-13

[Bastien Montagne]

Hi all,

Here are the notes from today's 9 UTC (10 CET) meeting in 
irc.freenode.net #blendercoders.
Reminder: meetings are on Mondays now, next meeting is 20 Nov, 17 UTC 
(18 CET).


1) Blender 2.79 release

- Nothing new really, as a reminder, 2.79a is needed, but not urgently.

- Help from other devs to triage, backport and test commits from master 
into 2.79 would be appreciated. Any dev should be able to help, it's a 
matter of:
-- Checking commits in master since 2.79 release, spot those which 
either fix regressions, or are trivial safe fixes (no cleanup, no new 
features, no complex/risky fixes unless they tackle some critical issue).
-- Cherry-pick them __locally__ into 2.79 branch, ensure they apply 
cleanly (but do not push those changes until they are agreed on!).

-- Send a list of selected commits to bf-committers for review.

- Also, usual reminder to help checking and triaging the bug tracker! ;)

2) Blender 2.8 projects

- Meeting agrees to insist on high priority of finishing on-going 
projects in 2.8, it is now much more important than adding new features. 
Half-finished code is bad for users (half-working Blender is non-working 
Blender!) and for developers (new code having to handle legacy one).


- Sergey Sharybin notes that depsgraph ownership is now correct 
per-scene-layer, switching active layer in "topbar" is working now.


- Also, thanks to Dalai Felinto and Sergey Sharybin, all Cycles 
regression tests are passing now in 2.8.


- Campbell Barton added new design/proposal to rework our notifier 
system, and address its current limitations (long-standing project, but 
now essential to finish manipulators, see 
https://developer.blender.org/T53308).


- Bastien Montagne should have static ID override ready for review and 
2.8 merge soon (not feature-complete, but needed to merge 
asset-engine/Amber work asap).


- Weekly reports:
-- Sergey Sharybin: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Nazg-gul/Foundation/2017#Week_310:_6th_-_12th_November
-- Campbell Barton: 
http://download.blender.org/ftp/ideasman42/donelist/2017.html#week-347-november-6
-- Bastien Montagne: 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Mont29/Foundation/2017#Week_217_-_11.2F04_to_11.2F10


3) Other projects

- Stefan Werner created a branch to finalize his Cryptomate patch for 
Cycles (an advanced object masking technique for Cycles/compositing, see 
https://developer.blender.org/diffusion/B/history/temp_cryptomatte/).


- Bastien Montagne started serious review work on Normal Tools from 2017 
GSoC by Rohan Rathi, still some work to do but things look good (see 
https://developer.blender.org/D2897).


Thanks,
Bastien
___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

[Bf-committers] Blender developers meeting notes - 2017-10-16

[Bastien Montagne]

Hi all,

Here are the notes from today's 8 UTC meeting in irc.freenode.net 
#blendercoders.
Reminder: meetings are on Mondays now, next meeting is 23 Oct, 16 UTC 
(18 CEST).


1) Blender 2.79 release

- 2.79a is needed, but not urgently, so meeting agreed on waiting after 
BConf to do it. Also, as a reminder, only trivial or safe fixes shall be 
backported from master to blender-2.79-release branch.


- Help from other devs to triage, backport and test commits from master 
into 2.79 would be appreciated, a separated email will be sent to 
bf-commiters later with details on that topic.


2) Blender 2.8 projects

- Not much to report, works keeps on going.

- Campbell Barton did tool system proposal (with proof of concept 
patch), see https://developer.blender.org/T53047.


http://download.blender.org/ftp/ideasman42/donelist/2017.html#week-343-october-9

- Bastien Montagne keeps working on the asset management system, among 
other things, added initial drag-and-adrop linking:


https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Mont29/Foundation/2017#Week_213_-_10.2F07_to_10.2F13

- Sergey Sharybin had a small week,

https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Nazg-gul/Foundation/2017#Week_306:_9th_-_15th_October

- Joshua Leung reminds that the advanced new Grease Pencil work shall be 
merged in main 2.8 branch in comming days.


3) Other projects

- Nothing mentionned here, aside from Sergey noting that he will take 
down development.blender.org server some time this week (probably this 
tuesday) to do some maintenance work.


Thanks,
Bastien

PS: sorry for the delay, we lost the power grid for 4h here this 
afternoon...

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] Using wheels in blender addons

[Bastien Montagne]

Yes, using threading in py scripts in Blender is perfectly valid - as 
long as you do not touch Blender data itself at all (nor try to call 
some operators from a thread, etc.). If you use your own code on your 
own data, no problem with threading at all (i18n messages generation 
script e.g. uses py threads, as well as temp instances of Blender ran in 
background, and so does the batch previews tools generating object 
previews in .blend files).


Cheers,
Bastien


Le 10/10/2017 à 19:56, Isaac Weaver a écrit :

It looks like you're using a threading executor to run each call to
requests. I thought that threading wasn't supported in blender[1], or does
that only apply to threading code that effects bpy.data?

What I'm doing currently is using asyncio.open_connection and building a
raw http request. But that seems too low level to be practical.

[1]
https://docs.blender.org/api/blender_python_api_2_78_1/info_gotcha.html#strange-errors-using-threading-module

Thanks,

~ Isaac

On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 3:28 AM, Sybren A. Stüvel  wrote:


Is aiohttp really necessary? I mean, we already bundle the Requests
library, so doing HTTP calls is already possible.

As far as asyncio goes, I've used it for the Blender Cloud add-on, and
it worked alright. I'm still not 100% convinced it's The Way To Go for
Blender, it has its pros and cons. However, you could take a peek at the
source code [1] to see how I used Requests with asyncio.

[1] https://developer.blender.org/diffusion/BCA/

Cheers,

Sybren


On 09/10/17 22:12, Isaac Weaver wrote:

I'm currently working on an addon that I would like to eventually get
included in Blender and was wondering if​ it's ok to use python wheels.

The

guidelines say not to use binary files (
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Dev:Doc/Process/Addons#Never_Do) but

I'm

wondering if that applies to wheels as well (I know the blender cloud

addon

uses a couple of wheels). Specifically, I'd like to include a wheel for
aiohttp.

Thanks,

~ Isaac
___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

--
Sybren A. Stüvel

https://stuvelfoto.nl/
https://stuvel.eu/

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] Library update: libsndfile 1.0.28

[Bastien Montagne]

We did not have any control over libsndfile version in install_deps, 
assuming any half-decent distro has reasonably recent version of it, 
would rather keep it that way (otherwise, we can also check for versions 
of all image libs, etc. - would become endless). ;)


Cheers,
Bastien


Le 18/09/2017 à 18:57, Ray Molenkamp a écrit :

Hello all,

I've just pushed an update to the cmake dependencies builder (mac/windows)
to update the previously untracked library libsndfile to 1.0.28.

The reason for this is that between the various supported platforms
we used 3 different versions, some of them with rather nasty bugs.

So to straighten that out, I request all platform maintainers to standardize
on libsndfile 1.0.28.

I have added it to the list of tracked libraries on:

https://wiki.blender.org/index.php?title=Dev:Doc/Building_Blender

Also there was some talk about turning this to a static library on windows
and can report back that it will will have to remain a dynamic library,
given building it static with mingw it will introduce an undesirable
dependency on libgcc.

Cheers,
Ray

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers



___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] Library update: Python 3.6.2

[Bastien Montagne]

Updated install_deps for python 3.6.2 and numpy 1.13.1.


Le 19/09/2017 à 11:44, Campbell Barton a écrit :

Hi, after 2.79 released we planned to bump Python to 3.6.
Could platform maintainers update Python builds to 3.6.2 in the next
week or two, we can switch.

Scripts should not need updating, I've been using Python3.6 since late
2016 with Blender and it works fine.

Some features in Py3.6 we can take advantage of are noted here:
https://developer.blender.org/T47811



___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] Blender 2.79 Release Candidate 2 AHOY

[Bastien Montagne]

Builds have been published, git repositories have been tagged,
py API doc has been updated, as well as bugfixes list... [1]

Thanks a lot everybody, now we may focus on 2.8! xD

Cheers,
Bastien

[1] 
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Dev:Ref/Release_Notes/2.79/Bug_Fixes#Release



Le 11/09/2017 à 21:46, Sergey Sharybin a écrit :

Hi,

All the builds are up at their final destination.

We need to give some hours to let mirrors to sync, then we can modify the
download page. Release candidate builds will be removed once download page
is updated.

On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 5:04 PM, Ray Molenkamp <r...@lazydodo.com> wrote:


windows builds are ready.

--Ray


On 9/11/2017 4:50 AM, Bastien Montagne wrote:

Hi,

We are ready for the 2.79 final release!

Information for platform maintainers:

- Build from the blender-2.79-release branch,
SHA 5bd8ac9abfa2fa5db8ddfef393fc2c4dc82ba22d
- Addons revision: f1c6cfa21594e7c8b7a43cd1e0653d8a812929c6
- Locale revision: 1bbc9bdabe4ed26c164aef8a43ef39657dc23cfb

Keep naming consistent with currently uploaded rc2. Make sure you're

using tagged libraries and not latest trunk libraries.

As usual, tagging (as well as API docs and fixlist updates) will happen

once all builds are up and we are sure we do not need to re-ahoy.

Thanks for your time and let me know when the builds are up.

Cheers,
Bastien
___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers






___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

[Bf-committers] Blender 2.79 Release Candidate 2 AHOY

[Bastien Montagne]

Hi,

We are ready for the 2.79 final release!

Information for platform maintainers:

- Build from the blender-2.79-release branch,
SHA 5bd8ac9abfa2fa5db8ddfef393fc2c4dc82ba22d
- Addons revision: f1c6cfa21594e7c8b7a43cd1e0653d8a812929c6
- Locale revision: 1bbc9bdabe4ed26c164aef8a43ef39657dc23cfb

Keep naming consistent with currently uploaded rc2. Make sure you're 
using tagged libraries and not latest trunk libraries.


As usual, tagging (as well as API docs and fixlist updates) will happen 
once all builds are up and we are sure we do not need to re-ahoy.


Thanks for your time and let me know when the builds are up.

Cheers,
Bastien
___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] [Bf-python] 2.79 release commits backport list

[Bastien Montagne]

@Campbell done :)


Le 11/09/2017 à 09:33, Campbell Barton a écrit :

@Bastien, recent commits are safe to include:
f56fea3d6b481b70e5ca518e41dab8c00bc26251
7e5687977287a0a8551a3593ebe60733b1c14af7

On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 4:55 PM, Bastien Montagne <montagn...@wanadoo.fr> wrote:

@Campbell and Sergey done. Also updated and backported translations…

Unless there is something new, would do the ahoy this afternoon (since I
should be offline at some point this morning, grr), so that’s kind of last
chance to backport something I guess. ;)

Laters,
Bastien


Le 09/09/2017 à 03:20, Campbell Barton a écrit :

Hi Bastien, please add 3c3d0898b too

On Sat, Sep 9, 2017 at 2:55 AM, Sergey Sharybin <sergey@gmail.com>
wrote:

Hi,

Bastien, mind adding to the list 4a74472 ?

On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 4:39 PM, Sergey Sharybin <sergey@gmail.com>
wrote:


Hi,

Bastien, Brecht doublechedked the fix and crash is solved for him [1].
So
no stoppers form my side.

As for 71f0c32, i think it's fine to backport. It's a regression after
all, which is solved. Didn't hear anyone complaining about the fix yet.

[1] https://developer.blender.org/T52635#457828

On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 2:48 PM, Sergey Sharybin <sergey@gmail.com>
wrote:


I've committed fix to the 2.79 branch.

Unfortunately, original bug i couldn't reproduce, so can not
doublecheck
it fixes T52635. Would like Brecht to run test on his machine prior to
AHOY.

On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 12:47 PM, Bastien Montagne
<montagn...@wanadoo.fr>
wrote:


Oki, noted.


Le 08/09/2017 à 12:36, Sergey Sharybin a écrit :


Hi,

We need some time to deal with https://developer.blender.org/T52635

Please do not AHOY before it's solved or reverted in the release
branch.

On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 12:09 PM, Bastien Montagne <
montagn...@wanadoo.fr>
wrote:

Here's updated list of backports.

http://pasteall.org/549912

Plan is to ahoy this afternoon, so it's last moments in case you'd
like to
include some more commits ;)

Bastien


Le 06/09/2017 à 09:51, Bastien Montagne a écrit :

Hi,

Backported requested changes, up-to-date list of backported commits
can
be found here: http://pasteall.org/547937

I’d propose to wait one more day and do release ahoy tomorrow?

There are two open questions currently re backporting:

* Sergey's 71f0c32 Fix T52522: VSE renders with alpha transparent
PNG
image incorrectly

* Own set of fixes for crash with looptris / DM, those are rather
involved changes, on the other hand had no reported issues with
them
in
over 2 weeks now, and they do fix annoying crashers in 2.79:
** https://developer.blender.org/rB00cb3527902b11b5f136432e8670
e299789b6716, which depends on:
*** https://developer.blender.org/rBe9cbc700efdb2510530de1785197
4986292f380a
*** https://developer.blender.org/rBe324172d9ca6690e8bd2c0a53f0f
7ad529d8e241
*** https://developer.blender.org/rBc034193821ec7e67a0ae1050c8cc
ef7b5cd5473b


Le 05/09/2017 à 20:09, Sergej Reich a écrit :

These two need to be included in 2.79 as well, otherwise rigid
bodies

are pretty broken.

4ad5df885820 Fix T52374: Changes of rigid body related settings
during
simulation will break the simulation

0fd31c53ee1a Rigidbody: Fix regression introduced in ee3fadd

Am Mittwoch, den 06.09.2017, 02:50 +1000 schrieb Campbell Barton:

Knife precision fix is safe for release: 6c66e1bc836f

On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 11:33 PM, Sergey Sharybin <
sergey@gmail.co
m> wrote:

For Cycles (and maybe Alembic?) tests you need to use lib folder

from 2.79
tag.

On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 3:19 PM, Bastien Montagne
<montagne29@wanado
o.fr>
wrote:

OK will keep it noted, we can probably merge it in one or two


days just
before ahoy then?

Also, did build and ran tests, aside from Cycles ones (guess
latest test
repo is no more aligned with 2.79 release code), everything
passes OK.



Le 04/09/2017 à 14:48, Sergey Sharybin a écrit :

Bastien, here is a fix for regression:


 71f0c32dad8 Fix T52522: VSE renders with alpha
transparent
PNG image
incorrectly

Technically, it should be included into 2.79, but some extra
tests are
needed.

On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Bastien Montagne
<montagne29@wa
nadoo.fr>
wrote:

Thanks Sergey, done :)



Le 04/09/2017 à 13:29, Sergey Sharybin a écrit :

Hi,

This commit was verified by Mai and safe fopr backpot

  dfae3de6bdf  Cycles: Fix stack overflow during
traversal caused by
floating overflow

Was requested earlier by Sybren in the list:

  696f4dc Alembic: Fix T52579: crash when replacing
slightly
different
alembic files

Own commits which i think should go in:

  436d1b4 Cycles: Fix issue with -0 being considered
a
non-finite
value
  a679457 Fix T51907: New Depsgraph - Camera
constraint
is not
evaluated
properly
  12d527f Cycles: Correct logging of sued CPU
intrisics
  33249f6 Fix T52533: Blender shuts down when
rendering
duplicated
smoke
domain
  885c0a5 Cycles: Fix compilation warning

Th

Re: [Bf-committers] [Bf-python] 2.79 release commits backport list

[Bastien Montagne]

@Campbell and Sergey done. Also updated and backported translations…

Unless there is something new, would do the ahoy this afternoon (since I 
should be offline at some point this morning, grr), so that’s kind of 
last chance to backport something I guess. ;)


Laters,
Bastien

Le 09/09/2017 à 03:20, Campbell Barton a écrit :

Hi Bastien, please add 3c3d0898b too

On Sat, Sep 9, 2017 at 2:55 AM, Sergey Sharybin <sergey@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi,

Bastien, mind adding to the list 4a74472 ?

On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 4:39 PM, Sergey Sharybin <sergey@gmail.com>
wrote:


Hi,

Bastien, Brecht doublechedked the fix and crash is solved for him [1]. So
no stoppers form my side.

As for 71f0c32, i think it's fine to backport. It's a regression after
all, which is solved. Didn't hear anyone complaining about the fix yet.

[1] https://developer.blender.org/T52635#457828

On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 2:48 PM, Sergey Sharybin <sergey@gmail.com>
wrote:


I've committed fix to the 2.79 branch.

Unfortunately, original bug i couldn't reproduce, so can not doublecheck
it fixes T52635. Would like Brecht to run test on his machine prior to AHOY.

On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 12:47 PM, Bastien Montagne <montagn...@wanadoo.fr>
wrote:


Oki, noted.


Le 08/09/2017 à 12:36, Sergey Sharybin a écrit :


Hi,

We need some time to deal with https://developer.blender.org/T52635

Please do not AHOY before it's solved or reverted in the release branch.

On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 12:09 PM, Bastien Montagne <
montagn...@wanadoo.fr>
wrote:

Here's updated list of backports.

http://pasteall.org/549912

Plan is to ahoy this afternoon, so it's last moments in case you'd
like to
include some more commits ;)

Bastien


Le 06/09/2017 à 09:51, Bastien Montagne a écrit :

Hi,

Backported requested changes, up-to-date list of backported commits
can
be found here: http://pasteall.org/547937

I’d propose to wait one more day and do release ahoy tomorrow?

There are two open questions currently re backporting:

* Sergey's 71f0c32 Fix T52522: VSE renders with alpha transparent PNG
image incorrectly

* Own set of fixes for crash with looptris / DM, those are rather
involved changes, on the other hand had no reported issues with them
in
over 2 weeks now, and they do fix annoying crashers in 2.79:
** https://developer.blender.org/rB00cb3527902b11b5f136432e8670
e299789b6716, which depends on:
*** https://developer.blender.org/rBe9cbc700efdb2510530de1785197
4986292f380a
*** https://developer.blender.org/rBe324172d9ca6690e8bd2c0a53f0f
7ad529d8e241
*** https://developer.blender.org/rBc034193821ec7e67a0ae1050c8cc
ef7b5cd5473b


Le 05/09/2017 à 20:09, Sergej Reich a écrit :

These two need to be included in 2.79 as well, otherwise rigid bodies

are pretty broken.

4ad5df885820 Fix T52374: Changes of rigid body related settings
during
simulation will break the simulation

0fd31c53ee1a Rigidbody: Fix regression introduced in ee3fadd

Am Mittwoch, den 06.09.2017, 02:50 +1000 schrieb Campbell Barton:

Knife precision fix is safe for release: 6c66e1bc836f

On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 11:33 PM, Sergey Sharybin <
sergey@gmail.co
m> wrote:

For Cycles (and maybe Alembic?) tests you need to use lib folder

from 2.79
tag.

On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 3:19 PM, Bastien Montagne <montagne29@wanado
o.fr>
wrote:

OK will keep it noted, we can probably merge it in one or two


days just
before ahoy then?

Also, did build and ran tests, aside from Cycles ones (guess
latest test
repo is no more aligned with 2.79 release code), everything
passes OK.



Le 04/09/2017 à 14:48, Sergey Sharybin a écrit :

Bastien, here is a fix for regression:


71f0c32dad8 Fix T52522: VSE renders with alpha transparent
PNG image
incorrectly

Technically, it should be included into 2.79, but some extra
tests are
needed.

On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Bastien Montagne <montagne29@wa
nadoo.fr>
wrote:

Thanks Sergey, done :)



Le 04/09/2017 à 13:29, Sergey Sharybin a écrit :

Hi,

This commit was verified by Mai and safe fopr backpot

 dfae3de6bdf  Cycles: Fix stack overflow during
traversal caused by
floating overflow

Was requested earlier by Sybren in the list:

 696f4dc Alembic: Fix T52579: crash when replacing
slightly
different
alembic files

Own commits which i think should go in:

 436d1b4 Cycles: Fix issue with -0 being considered a
non-finite
value
 a679457 Fix T51907: New Depsgraph - Camera constraint
is not
evaluated
properly
 12d527f Cycles: Correct logging of sued CPU intrisics
 33249f6 Fix T52533: Blender shuts down when rendering
duplicated
smoke
domain
 885c0a5 Cycles: Fix compilation warning

This one is simple fewliner, but needs some merging. Can do
it manually:
 9f40153 Fix T52209: New Depsgraph - animated follow
curve
constraint
sometimes freaks out when the curve has a parent


On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 1:04 PM, Bastien Montagne 
Hi,

c6719730921 (Fix: GPencil Sequence

Re: [Bf-committers] [Bf-python] 2.79 release commits backport list

[Bastien Montagne]

Oki, noted.


Le 08/09/2017 à 12:36, Sergey Sharybin a écrit :

Hi,

We need some time to deal with https://developer.blender.org/T52635

Please do not AHOY before it's solved or reverted in the release branch.

On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 12:09 PM, Bastien Montagne <montagn...@wanadoo.fr>
wrote:


Here's updated list of backports.

http://pasteall.org/549912

Plan is to ahoy this afternoon, so it's last moments in case you'd like to
include some more commits ;)

Bastien


Le 06/09/2017 à 09:51, Bastien Montagne a écrit :


Hi,

Backported requested changes, up-to-date list of backported commits can
be found here: http://pasteall.org/547937

I’d propose to wait one more day and do release ahoy tomorrow?

There are two open questions currently re backporting:

* Sergey's 71f0c32 Fix T52522: VSE renders with alpha transparent PNG
image incorrectly

* Own set of fixes for crash with looptris / DM, those are rather
involved changes, on the other hand had no reported issues with them in
over 2 weeks now, and they do fix annoying crashers in 2.79:
** https://developer.blender.org/rB00cb3527902b11b5f136432e8670
e299789b6716, which depends on:
*** https://developer.blender.org/rBe9cbc700efdb2510530de1785197
4986292f380a
*** https://developer.blender.org/rBe324172d9ca6690e8bd2c0a53f0f
7ad529d8e241
*** https://developer.blender.org/rBc034193821ec7e67a0ae1050c8cc
ef7b5cd5473b


Le 05/09/2017 à 20:09, Sergej Reich a écrit :


These two need to be included in 2.79 as well, otherwise rigid bodies
are pretty broken.

4ad5df885820 Fix T52374: Changes of rigid body related settings during
simulation will break the simulation

0fd31c53ee1a Rigidbody: Fix regression introduced in ee3fadd

Am Mittwoch, den 06.09.2017, 02:50 +1000 schrieb Campbell Barton:


Knife precision fix is safe for release: 6c66e1bc836f

On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 11:33 PM, Sergey Sharybin <sergey@gmail.co
m> wrote:


For Cycles (and maybe Alembic?) tests you need to use lib folder
from 2.79
tag.

On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 3:19 PM, Bastien Montagne <montagne29@wanado
o.fr>
wrote:

OK will keep it noted, we can probably merge it in one or two

days just
before ahoy then?

Also, did build and ran tests, aside from Cycles ones (guess
latest test
repo is no more aligned with 2.79 release code), everything
passes OK.



Le 04/09/2017 à 14:48, Sergey Sharybin a écrit :

Bastien, here is a fix for regression:

   71f0c32dad8 Fix T52522: VSE renders with alpha transparent
PNG image
incorrectly

Technically, it should be included into 2.79, but some extra
tests are
needed.

On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Bastien Montagne <montagne29@wa
nadoo.fr>
wrote:

Thanks Sergey, done :)



Le 04/09/2017 à 13:29, Sergey Sharybin a écrit :

Hi,


This commit was verified by Mai and safe fopr backpot
dfae3de6bdf  Cycles: Fix stack overflow during
traversal caused by
floating overflow

Was requested earlier by Sybren in the list:

696f4dc Alembic: Fix T52579: crash when replacing
slightly
different
alembic files

Own commits which i think should go in:

436d1b4 Cycles: Fix issue with -0 being considered a
non-finite
value
a679457 Fix T51907: New Depsgraph - Camera constraint
is not
evaluated
properly
12d527f Cycles: Correct logging of sued CPU intrisics
33249f6 Fix T52533: Blender shuts down when rendering
duplicated
smoke
domain
885c0a5 Cycles: Fix compilation warning

This one is simple fewliner, but needs some merging. Can do
it manually:
9f40153 Fix T52209: New Depsgraph - animated follow
curve
constraint
sometimes freaks out when the curve has a parent


On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 1:04 PM, Bastien Montagne 
Le 04/09/2017 à 12:54, Joshua Leung a écrit :

Hi,

c6719730921 (Fix: GPencil Sequence Interpolation)  and

the following
two
commits (4f6196a0413, b227a3388d4) should also be
included.

Cheers,
Joshua


On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 10:53 PM, blendergit 
wrote:

Hi,

It’s not a big issue, but you could add: 4d8e3b649ba8
Fix T52483: Fill


is
incorrect for interpolated strokes.

Cheers,
Antonio Vazquez


De: Bastien Montagne
Enviado: lunes, 4 de septiembre de 2017 12:42
Para: bf-blender developers
Asunto: [Bf-committers] 2.79 release commits backport
list

Hi,

Last Sunday meeting we decided to do final 2.79
release instead of a
third RC (basically because this is dragging for too
long, and RC's
never get the kind of testing a real release gets
anyways).

Here is a first list of proposed commits to backport,
please check
yours
and report if you want some more included (and please
remember to add
small note in your commit messages about it in the
future, it helps a
lot!):

53ec0e5166a  Fix T52227: Time Slide tool doesn't take
NLA mapping
into
account
44e10a5c66c  Increase max/min frame range to over a
million
8d207cdc3b3  Fix T52472: VSE Audio Volume not set
immediately
29b2a47a8a3  Fix T52588: Shape key value driver
variables of
duplicated
object sets refer to old objects.
dcebad773fd  Fix T524

Re: [Bf-committers] [Bf-python] 2.79 release commits backport list

[Bastien Montagne]

Here's updated list of backports.

http://pasteall.org/549912

Plan is to ahoy this afternoon, so it's last moments in case you'd like 
to include some more commits ;)


Bastien

Le 06/09/2017 à 09:51, Bastien Montagne a écrit :

Hi,

Backported requested changes, up-to-date list of backported commits 
can be found here: http://pasteall.org/547937


I’d propose to wait one more day and do release ahoy tomorrow?

There are two open questions currently re backporting:

* Sergey's 71f0c32 Fix T52522: VSE renders with alpha transparent PNG 
image incorrectly


* Own set of fixes for crash with looptris / DM, those are rather 
involved changes, on the other hand had no reported issues with them 
in over 2 weeks now, and they do fix annoying crashers in 2.79:
** 
https://developer.blender.org/rB00cb3527902b11b5f136432e8670e299789b6716, 
which depends on:
*** 
https://developer.blender.org/rBe9cbc700efdb2510530de17851974986292f380a
*** 
https://developer.blender.org/rBe324172d9ca6690e8bd2c0a53f0f7ad529d8e241
*** 
https://developer.blender.org/rBc034193821ec7e67a0ae1050c8ccef7b5cd5473b



Le 05/09/2017 à 20:09, Sergej Reich a écrit :

These two need to be included in 2.79 as well, otherwise rigid bodies
are pretty broken.

4ad5df885820 Fix T52374: Changes of rigid body related settings during
simulation will break the simulation

0fd31c53ee1a Rigidbody: Fix regression introduced in ee3fadd

Am Mittwoch, den 06.09.2017, 02:50 +1000 schrieb Campbell Barton:

Knife precision fix is safe for release: 6c66e1bc836f

On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 11:33 PM, Sergey Sharybin <sergey@gmail.co
m> wrote:

For Cycles (and maybe Alembic?) tests you need to use lib folder
from 2.79
tag.

On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 3:19 PM, Bastien Montagne <montagne29@wanado
o.fr>
wrote:


OK will keep it noted, we can probably merge it in one or two
days just
before ahoy then?

Also, did build and ran tests, aside from Cycles ones (guess
latest test
repo is no more aligned with 2.79 release code), everything
passes OK.



Le 04/09/2017 à 14:48, Sergey Sharybin a écrit :


Bastien, here is a fix for regression:

  71f0c32dad8 Fix T52522: VSE renders with alpha transparent
PNG image
incorrectly

Technically, it should be included into 2.79, but some extra
tests are
needed.

On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Bastien Montagne <montagne29@wa
nadoo.fr>
wrote:

Thanks Sergey, done :)



Le 04/09/2017 à 13:29, Sergey Sharybin a écrit :

Hi,

This commit was verified by Mai and safe fopr backpot
   dfae3de6bdf  Cycles: Fix stack overflow during
traversal caused by
floating overflow

Was requested earlier by Sybren in the list:

   696f4dc Alembic: Fix T52579: crash when replacing
slightly
different
alembic files

Own commits which i think should go in:

   436d1b4 Cycles: Fix issue with -0 being considered a
non-finite
value
   a679457 Fix T51907: New Depsgraph - Camera constraint
is not
evaluated
properly
   12d527f Cycles: Correct logging of sued CPU intrisics
   33249f6 Fix T52533: Blender shuts down when rendering
duplicated
smoke
domain
   885c0a5 Cycles: Fix compilation warning

This one is simple fewliner, but needs some merging. Can do
it manually:
   9f40153 Fix T52209: New Depsgraph - animated follow
curve
constraint
sometimes freaks out when the curve has a parent


On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 1:04 PM, Bastien Montagne 

Le 04/09/2017 à 12:54, Joshua Leung a écrit :

Hi,


c6719730921 (Fix: GPencil Sequence Interpolation)  and
the following
two
commits (4f6196a0413, b227a3388d4) should also be
included.

Cheers,
Joshua


On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 10:53 PM, blendergit 
wrote:

Hi,

It’s not a big issue, but you could add: 4d8e3b649ba8
Fix T52483: Fill

is
incorrect for interpolated strokes.

Cheers,
Antonio Vazquez


De: Bastien Montagne
Enviado: lunes, 4 de septiembre de 2017 12:42
Para: bf-blender developers
Asunto: [Bf-committers] 2.79 release commits backport
list

Hi,

Last Sunday meeting we decided to do final 2.79
release instead of a
third RC (basically because this is dragging for too
long, and RC's
never get the kind of testing a real release gets
anyways).

Here is a first list of proposed commits to backport,
please check
yours
and report if you want some more included (and please
remember to add
small note in your commit messages about it in the
future, it helps a
lot!):

53ec0e5166a  Fix T52227: Time Slide tool doesn't take
NLA mapping
into
account
44e10a5c66c  Increase max/min frame range to over a
million
8d207cdc3b3  Fix T52472: VSE Audio Volume not set
immediately
29b2a47a8a3  Fix T52588: Shape key value driver
variables of
duplicated
object sets refer to old objects.
dcebad773fd  Fix T52498: Deleting force field doesn't
remove
"Surface"
from modifier stack.
fe71c86888f  Fix T52478: Error report "Shrinkwrap:
out of memory" on
invisible target.
5c4fc93f67f  Fix T52538: Outliner crash when
displaying groups and
using
Show Active on editmode bone not in any g

Re: [Bf-committers] 2.79 release commits backport list

[Bastien Montagne]

Hi,

Backported requested changes, up-to-date list of backported commits can 
be found here: http://pasteall.org/547937


I’d propose to wait one more day and do release ahoy tomorrow?

There are two open questions currently re backporting:

* Sergey's 71f0c32 Fix T52522: VSE renders with alpha transparent PNG 
image incorrectly


* Own set of fixes for crash with looptris / DM, those are rather 
involved changes, on the other hand had no reported issues with them in 
over 2 weeks now, and they do fix annoying crashers in 2.79:
** 
https://developer.blender.org/rB00cb3527902b11b5f136432e8670e299789b6716, 
which depends on:

*** https://developer.blender.org/rBe9cbc700efdb2510530de17851974986292f380a
*** https://developer.blender.org/rBe324172d9ca6690e8bd2c0a53f0f7ad529d8e241
*** https://developer.blender.org/rBc034193821ec7e67a0ae1050c8ccef7b5cd5473b


Le 05/09/2017 à 20:09, Sergej Reich a écrit :

These two need to be included in 2.79 as well, otherwise rigid bodies
are pretty broken.

4ad5df885820 Fix T52374: Changes of rigid body related settings during
simulation will break the simulation

0fd31c53ee1a Rigidbody: Fix regression introduced in ee3fadd

Am Mittwoch, den 06.09.2017, 02:50 +1000 schrieb Campbell Barton:

Knife precision fix is safe for release: 6c66e1bc836f

On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 11:33 PM, Sergey Sharybin <sergey@gmail.co
m> wrote:

For Cycles (and maybe Alembic?) tests you need to use lib folder
from 2.79
tag.

On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 3:19 PM, Bastien Montagne <montagne29@wanado
o.fr>
wrote:


OK will keep it noted, we can probably merge it in one or two
days just
before ahoy then?

Also, did build and ran tests, aside from Cycles ones (guess
latest test
repo is no more aligned with 2.79 release code), everything
passes OK.



Le 04/09/2017 à 14:48, Sergey Sharybin a écrit :


Bastien, here is a fix for regression:

  71f0c32dad8 Fix T52522: VSE renders with alpha transparent
PNG image
incorrectly

Technically, it should be included into 2.79, but some extra
tests are
needed.

On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Bastien Montagne <montagne29@wa
nadoo.fr>
wrote:

Thanks Sergey, done :)



Le 04/09/2017 à 13:29, Sergey Sharybin a écrit :

Hi,

This commit was verified by Mai and safe fopr backpot
   dfae3de6bdf  Cycles: Fix stack overflow during
traversal caused by
floating overflow

Was requested earlier by Sybren in the list:

   696f4dc Alembic: Fix T52579: crash when replacing
slightly
different
alembic files

Own commits which i think should go in:

   436d1b4 Cycles: Fix issue with -0 being considered a
non-finite
value
   a679457 Fix T51907: New Depsgraph - Camera constraint
is not
evaluated
properly
   12d527f Cycles: Correct logging of sued CPU intrisics
   33249f6 Fix T52533: Blender shuts down when rendering
duplicated
smoke
domain
   885c0a5 Cycles: Fix compilation warning

This one is simple fewliner, but needs some merging. Can do
it manually:
   9f40153 Fix T52209: New Depsgraph - animated follow
curve
constraint
sometimes freaks out when the curve has a parent


On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 1:04 PM, Bastien Montagne 

Le 04/09/2017 à 12:54, Joshua Leung a écrit :

Hi,


c6719730921 (Fix: GPencil Sequence Interpolation)  and
the following
two
commits (4f6196a0413, b227a3388d4) should also be
included.

Cheers,
Joshua


On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 10:53 PM, blendergit 
wrote:

Hi,

It’s not a big issue, but you could add: 4d8e3b649ba8
Fix T52483: Fill

is
incorrect for interpolated strokes.

Cheers,
Antonio Vazquez


De: Bastien Montagne
Enviado: lunes, 4 de septiembre de 2017 12:42
Para: bf-blender developers
Asunto: [Bf-committers] 2.79 release commits backport
list

Hi,

Last Sunday meeting we decided to do final 2.79
release instead of a
third RC (basically because this is dragging for too
long, and RC's
never get the kind of testing a real release gets
anyways).

Here is a first list of proposed commits to backport,
please check
yours
and report if you want some more included (and please
remember to add
small note in your commit messages about it in the
future, it helps a
lot!):

53ec0e5166a  Fix T52227: Time Slide tool doesn't take
NLA mapping
into
account
44e10a5c66c  Increase max/min frame range to over a
million
8d207cdc3b3  Fix T52472: VSE Audio Volume not set
immediately
29b2a47a8a3  Fix T52588: Shape key value driver
variables of
duplicated
object sets refer to old objects.
dcebad773fd  Fix T52498: Deleting force field doesn't
remove
"Surface"
from modifier stack.
fe71c86888f  Fix T52478: Error report "Shrinkwrap:
out of memory" on
invisible target.
5c4fc93f67f  Fix T52538: Outliner crash when
displaying groups and
using
Show Active on editmode bone not in any groups
f9a3d01452e  Cycles: Mark pixels with negative values
as outliers
e2ffad7823c  Fix T52481: After making all local,
local proxies of
linked
data get broken after file save and reload.
dfae3de6bdf  Cycles: Fix stack overflow during

Re: [Bf-committers] 2.79 release commits backport list

[Bastien Montagne]

OK will keep it noted, we can probably merge it in one or two days just 
before ahoy then?


Also, did build and ran tests, aside from Cycles ones (guess latest test 
repo is no more aligned with 2.79 release code), everything passes OK.



Le 04/09/2017 à 14:48, Sergey Sharybin a écrit :

Bastien, here is a fix for regression:

 71f0c32dad8 Fix T52522: VSE renders with alpha transparent PNG image
incorrectly

Technically, it should be included into 2.79, but some extra tests are
needed.

On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Bastien Montagne <montagn...@wanadoo.fr>
wrote:


Thanks Sergey, done :)



Le 04/09/2017 à 13:29, Sergey Sharybin a écrit :


Hi,

This commit was verified by Mai and safe fopr backpot
  dfae3de6bdf  Cycles: Fix stack overflow during traversal caused by
floating overflow

Was requested earlier by Sybren in the list:

  696f4dc Alembic: Fix T52579: crash when replacing slightly different
alembic files

Own commits which i think should go in:

  436d1b4 Cycles: Fix issue with -0 being considered a non-finite value
  a679457 Fix T51907: New Depsgraph - Camera constraint is not
evaluated
properly
  12d527f Cycles: Correct logging of sued CPU intrisics
  33249f6 Fix T52533: Blender shuts down when rendering duplicated
smoke
domain
  885c0a5 Cycles: Fix compilation warning

This one is simple fewliner, but needs some merging. Can do it manually:
  9f40153 Fix T52209: New Depsgraph - animated follow curve constraint
sometimes freaks out when the curve has a parent


On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 1:04 PM, Bastien Montagne <montagn...@wanadoo.fr>
wrote:

@Antonio and Joshua thanks, all four commits have been added.



Le 04/09/2017 à 12:54, Joshua Leung a écrit :

Hi,

c6719730921 (Fix: GPencil Sequence Interpolation)  and the following two
commits (4f6196a0413, b227a3388d4) should also be included.

Cheers,
Joshua


On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 10:53 PM, blendergit <blender...@gmail.com>
wrote:

Hi,


It’s not a big issue, but you could add: 4d8e3b649ba8 Fix T52483: Fill
is
incorrect for interpolated strokes.

Cheers,
Antonio Vazquez


De: Bastien Montagne
Enviado: lunes, 4 de septiembre de 2017 12:42
Para: bf-blender developers
Asunto: [Bf-committers] 2.79 release commits backport list

Hi,

Last Sunday meeting we decided to do final 2.79 release instead of a
third RC (basically because this is dragging for too long, and RC's
never get the kind of testing a real release gets anyways).

Here is a first list of proposed commits to backport, please check
yours
and report if you want some more included (and please remember to add
small note in your commit messages about it in the future, it helps a
lot!):

53ec0e5166a  Fix T52227: Time Slide tool doesn't take NLA mapping into
account
44e10a5c66c  Increase max/min frame range to over a million
8d207cdc3b3  Fix T52472: VSE Audio Volume not set immediately
29b2a47a8a3  Fix T52588: Shape key value driver variables of duplicated
object sets refer to old objects.
dcebad773fd  Fix T52498: Deleting force field doesn't remove "Surface"
from modifier stack.
fe71c86888f  Fix T52478: Error report "Shrinkwrap: out of memory" on
invisible target.
5c4fc93f67f  Fix T52538: Outliner crash when displaying groups and
using
Show Active on editmode bone not in any groups
f9a3d01452e  Cycles: Mark pixels with negative values as outliers
e2ffad7823c  Fix T52481: After making all local, local proxies of
linked
data get broken after file save and reload.
dfae3de6bdf  Cycles: Fix stack overflow during traversal caused by
floating overflow  ??? => Check with Maiself?
5c60721c9e3  Fix T51805: Overlapping volumes renders incorrect on AMD
GPU
1a76bc7aeb8  Fix T52218: Missing update when reconnecting node
980a8646d8d  Fix T52466: Silence search for button_context menu type.
46997992882  Fix threading conflict when doing Cycles background render
1155fc94fd1  Fix T52454: Crash in DEG_graph_on_visible_update when
activating scene layer
47d1f67eab9  Fix T52473: blender internal Fresnel and Layer Weight only
work with linked normal.
146b0c6b049  Fix T52439: Crash after adjusting lenght of hair
particles.

2ca1f297486  BMesh: use predictable order for remove-doubles
cb7f1f81606  Docs: BMesh.from_mesh behavior w/ multiple calls
0b5cabdca5d  Fix T51400: Pasting hex code fails
b07dcb8fb06  Missed last commit
b6b27b06711  Fix T52515: Crash on BMesh.to_mesh()
fa365d5f2f9  Fix minor Mesh -> BMesh conversion issues
e4762980840  Docs: rename var and comment how it's used
0b5b464e823  Correction to last fix
76d695f7611  Fix T52490: NDOF orbit doesn't lock in ortho view
3277bd4031d  Fix T52396: Crash loading template w/o config dir
55861cb2346  PyAPI: avoid instantiating args twice in macro
b8d77c44f11  Cleanup: remove space from filenames
46b9f89f5e4  Tests: fix incorrect check for hidden dir
f09dee5aed3  Fix error in PointerProperty argument list
592dd9dea6a  Modify menu from last commit
361c7cbbc57  Fix T52434: Restore mesh

Re: [Bf-committers] Addons 2.79 release backports

[Bastien Montagne]

Thanks for the list, cherry-picked those commits from rBA master already:

3c6eef90704eOscurart Tools: Remove duplicate bl_idname entry
9c8805a7af58Cloud Generator: Fix typo with operator return
e66713cfad6efix T52642: math_vis - avoid eror message when defining 
an empty array in the...
6314517f4884*Fixed: Cube and Plane meta elements were missing since 
all meta were no longer...
f4d6aad738aearchipack: background renderer use factory-startup to 
prevent other addon issues
3a94eba6d4a1Cleanup: quiet warnings 6aa1c9aeb6f4Magic UV: fix 
bug (failed to copy/paste UV seam among objects)
426a14a68b90Fix T52548 missing render layer socket names (fix for 
2.79 release)

f1ec09b14510geodesic domes: help menu/wiki Fix T52554
e2319230ebddFix for previous commit rBAc471c3765bfb0, sorry about 
the noise :|

47f54fec4685update e2f code for non-intersection scenario
c471c3765bfbFix stupid mistake (collision) in registered classes names.
835f4068ae62Materials Utils Specials: Don't open the Tweak on all 
materials

31499a1ae035archipack: fix performance issue in draw window/door tools
32dc2209dd67Add new objects to MESH group
9ab377b23458Improve to objects to groups. Only set the selected objects
5e4e29c46813Correct mistake skipping hidden dirs


Those two do not merge properly, probably missing some other commit first?

b27d39a2e095object_skinify.py remove os imports, cleanup. 2.79 
release backport. T52536

4c037a84c211object_skinify.py fix for 2.79 release T52536


Le 04/09/2017 à 12:52, Brendon Murphy a écrit :

hi, here's the list of Addons backports for 2.79 release.

3c6eef90704eOscurart Tools: Remove duplicate bl_idname entry
9c8805a7af58Cloud Generator: Fix typo with operator return
e66713cfad6efix T52642: math_vis - avoid eror message when
defining an empty array in the… 6314517f4884*Fixed: Cube and Plane
meta elements were missing since all meta were no longer…

f4d6aad738aearchipack: background renderer use factory-startup to
prevent other addon issues
3a94eba6d4a1Cleanup: quiet warnings 6aa1c9aeb6f4Magic UV: fix
bug (failed to copy/paste UV seam among objects)
426a14a68b90Fix T52548 missing render layer socket names (fix for
2.79 release)
f1ec09b14510geodesic domes: help menu/wiki Fix T52554
e2319230ebddFix for previous commit rBAc471c3765bfb0, sorry about
the noise :| 47f54fec4685update e2f code for non-intersection
scenario
c471c3765bfbFix stupid mistake (collision) in registered classes
names. 835f4068ae62Materials Utils Specials: Don't open the Tweak
on all materials 31499a1ae035archipack: fix performance issue in
draw window/door tools 32dc2209dd67Add new objects to MESH group
9ab377b23458Improve to objects to groups. Only set the selected
objects 5e4e29c46813Correct mistake skipping hidden dirs

Note: object_skinify needs a final commit: T52536

Fix should be incoming any moment.

Campbell could decide if the name changing commits he made are
appropriate for 2.79, if so feel free to add.

Thanks.

Brendon and Vuk

aka: meta-androcto and lijenstina
___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] 2.79 release commits backport list

[Bastien Montagne]

Thanks Sergey, done :)


Le 04/09/2017 à 13:29, Sergey Sharybin a écrit :

Hi,

This commit was verified by Mai and safe fopr backpot
 dfae3de6bdf  Cycles: Fix stack overflow during traversal caused by
floating overflow

Was requested earlier by Sybren in the list:

 696f4dc Alembic: Fix T52579: crash when replacing slightly different
alembic files

Own commits which i think should go in:

 436d1b4 Cycles: Fix issue with -0 being considered a non-finite value
 a679457 Fix T51907: New Depsgraph - Camera constraint is not evaluated
properly
 12d527f Cycles: Correct logging of sued CPU intrisics
 33249f6 Fix T52533: Blender shuts down when rendering duplicated smoke
domain
 885c0a5 Cycles: Fix compilation warning

This one is simple fewliner, but needs some merging. Can do it manually:
 9f40153 Fix T52209: New Depsgraph - animated follow curve constraint
sometimes freaks out when the curve has a parent


On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 1:04 PM, Bastien Montagne <montagn...@wanadoo.fr>
wrote:


@Antonio and Joshua thanks, all four commits have been added.



Le 04/09/2017 à 12:54, Joshua Leung a écrit :


Hi,

c6719730921 (Fix: GPencil Sequence Interpolation)  and the following two
commits (4f6196a0413, b227a3388d4) should also be included.

Cheers,
Joshua


On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 10:53 PM, blendergit <blender...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi,

It’s not a big issue, but you could add: 4d8e3b649ba8 Fix T52483: Fill is
incorrect for interpolated strokes.

Cheers,
Antonio Vazquez


De: Bastien Montagne
Enviado: lunes, 4 de septiembre de 2017 12:42
Para: bf-blender developers
Asunto: [Bf-committers] 2.79 release commits backport list

Hi,

Last Sunday meeting we decided to do final 2.79 release instead of a
third RC (basically because this is dragging for too long, and RC's
never get the kind of testing a real release gets anyways).

Here is a first list of proposed commits to backport, please check yours
and report if you want some more included (and please remember to add
small note in your commit messages about it in the future, it helps a
lot!):

53ec0e5166a  Fix T52227: Time Slide tool doesn't take NLA mapping into
account
44e10a5c66c  Increase max/min frame range to over a million
8d207cdc3b3  Fix T52472: VSE Audio Volume not set immediately
29b2a47a8a3  Fix T52588: Shape key value driver variables of duplicated
object sets refer to old objects.
dcebad773fd  Fix T52498: Deleting force field doesn't remove "Surface"
from modifier stack.
fe71c86888f  Fix T52478: Error report "Shrinkwrap: out of memory" on
invisible target.
5c4fc93f67f  Fix T52538: Outliner crash when displaying groups and using
Show Active on editmode bone not in any groups
f9a3d01452e  Cycles: Mark pixels with negative values as outliers
e2ffad7823c  Fix T52481: After making all local, local proxies of linked
data get broken after file save and reload.
dfae3de6bdf  Cycles: Fix stack overflow during traversal caused by
floating overflow  ??? => Check with Maiself?
5c60721c9e3  Fix T51805: Overlapping volumes renders incorrect on AMD GPU
1a76bc7aeb8  Fix T52218: Missing update when reconnecting node
980a8646d8d  Fix T52466: Silence search for button_context menu type.
46997992882  Fix threading conflict when doing Cycles background render
1155fc94fd1  Fix T52454: Crash in DEG_graph_on_visible_update when
activating scene layer
47d1f67eab9  Fix T52473: blender internal Fresnel and Layer Weight only
work with linked normal.
146b0c6b049  Fix T52439: Crash after adjusting lenght of hair particles.

2ca1f297486  BMesh: use predictable order for remove-doubles
cb7f1f81606  Docs: BMesh.from_mesh behavior w/ multiple calls
0b5cabdca5d  Fix T51400: Pasting hex code fails
b07dcb8fb06  Missed last commit
b6b27b06711  Fix T52515: Crash on BMesh.to_mesh()
fa365d5f2f9  Fix minor Mesh -> BMesh conversion issues
e4762980840  Docs: rename var and comment how it's used
0b5b464e823  Correction to last fix
76d695f7611  Fix T52490: NDOF orbit doesn't lock in ortho view
3277bd4031d  Fix T52396: Crash loading template w/o config dir
55861cb2346  PyAPI: avoid instantiating args twice in macro
b8d77c44f11  Cleanup: remove space from filenames
46b9f89f5e4  Tests: fix incorrect check for hidden dir
f09dee5aed3  Fix error in PointerProperty argument list
592dd9dea6a  Modify menu from last commit
361c7cbbc57  Fix T52434: Restore mesh center of mass calculation
f6825d333bf  Fix bpy library load: invalid function signature
2ff9c8a3bc5  PyAPI: avoid redundant PyLong_AsLong call

Will backport those already and make first round of tests (and update
i18n files) in the meanwhile)

Cheers,
Bastien

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

_

Re: [Bf-committers] 2.79 release commits backport list

[Bastien Montagne]

@Antonio and Joshua thanks, all four commits have been added.


Le 04/09/2017 à 12:54, Joshua Leung a écrit :

Hi,

c6719730921 (Fix: GPencil Sequence Interpolation)  and the following two
commits (4f6196a0413, b227a3388d4) should also be included.

Cheers,
Joshua


On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 10:53 PM, blendergit <blender...@gmail.com> wrote:


Hi,

It’s not a big issue, but you could add: 4d8e3b649ba8 Fix T52483: Fill is
incorrect for interpolated strokes.

Cheers,
Antonio Vazquez


De: Bastien Montagne
Enviado: lunes, 4 de septiembre de 2017 12:42
Para: bf-blender developers
Asunto: [Bf-committers] 2.79 release commits backport list

Hi,

Last Sunday meeting we decided to do final 2.79 release instead of a
third RC (basically because this is dragging for too long, and RC's
never get the kind of testing a real release gets anyways).

Here is a first list of proposed commits to backport, please check yours
and report if you want some more included (and please remember to add
small note in your commit messages about it in the future, it helps a
lot!):

53ec0e5166a  Fix T52227: Time Slide tool doesn't take NLA mapping into
account
44e10a5c66c  Increase max/min frame range to over a million
8d207cdc3b3  Fix T52472: VSE Audio Volume not set immediately
29b2a47a8a3  Fix T52588: Shape key value driver variables of duplicated
object sets refer to old objects.
dcebad773fd  Fix T52498: Deleting force field doesn't remove "Surface"
from modifier stack.
fe71c86888f  Fix T52478: Error report "Shrinkwrap: out of memory" on
invisible target.
5c4fc93f67f  Fix T52538: Outliner crash when displaying groups and using
Show Active on editmode bone not in any groups
f9a3d01452e  Cycles: Mark pixels with negative values as outliers
e2ffad7823c  Fix T52481: After making all local, local proxies of linked
data get broken after file save and reload.
dfae3de6bdf  Cycles: Fix stack overflow during traversal caused by
floating overflow  ??? => Check with Maiself?
5c60721c9e3  Fix T51805: Overlapping volumes renders incorrect on AMD GPU
1a76bc7aeb8  Fix T52218: Missing update when reconnecting node
980a8646d8d  Fix T52466: Silence search for button_context menu type.
46997992882  Fix threading conflict when doing Cycles background render
1155fc94fd1  Fix T52454: Crash in DEG_graph_on_visible_update when
activating scene layer
47d1f67eab9  Fix T52473: blender internal Fresnel and Layer Weight only
work with linked normal.
146b0c6b049  Fix T52439: Crash after adjusting lenght of hair particles.

2ca1f297486  BMesh: use predictable order for remove-doubles
cb7f1f81606  Docs: BMesh.from_mesh behavior w/ multiple calls
0b5cabdca5d  Fix T51400: Pasting hex code fails
b07dcb8fb06  Missed last commit
b6b27b06711  Fix T52515: Crash on BMesh.to_mesh()
fa365d5f2f9  Fix minor Mesh -> BMesh conversion issues
e4762980840  Docs: rename var and comment how it's used
0b5b464e823  Correction to last fix
76d695f7611  Fix T52490: NDOF orbit doesn't lock in ortho view
3277bd4031d  Fix T52396: Crash loading template w/o config dir
55861cb2346  PyAPI: avoid instantiating args twice in macro
b8d77c44f11  Cleanup: remove space from filenames
46b9f89f5e4  Tests: fix incorrect check for hidden dir
f09dee5aed3  Fix error in PointerProperty argument list
592dd9dea6a  Modify menu from last commit
361c7cbbc57  Fix T52434: Restore mesh center of mass calculation
f6825d333bf  Fix bpy library load: invalid function signature
2ff9c8a3bc5  PyAPI: avoid redundant PyLong_AsLong call

Will backport those already and make first round of tests (and update
i18n files) in the meanwhile)

Cheers,
Bastien

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

[Bf-committers] 2.79 release commits backport list

[Bastien Montagne]

Hi,

Last Sunday meeting we decided to do final 2.79 release instead of a 
third RC (basically because this is dragging for too long, and RC's 
never get the kind of testing a real release gets anyways).


Here is a first list of proposed commits to backport, please check yours 
and report if you want some more included (and please remember to add 
small note in your commit messages about it in the future, it helps a lot!):


53ec0e5166a  Fix T52227: Time Slide tool doesn't take NLA mapping into 
account

44e10a5c66c  Increase max/min frame range to over a million
8d207cdc3b3  Fix T52472: VSE Audio Volume not set immediately
29b2a47a8a3  Fix T52588: Shape key value driver variables of duplicated 
object sets refer to old objects.
dcebad773fd  Fix T52498: Deleting force field doesn't remove "Surface" 
from modifier stack.
fe71c86888f  Fix T52478: Error report "Shrinkwrap: out of memory" on 
invisible target.
5c4fc93f67f  Fix T52538: Outliner crash when displaying groups and using 
Show Active on editmode bone not in any groups

f9a3d01452e  Cycles: Mark pixels with negative values as outliers
e2ffad7823c  Fix T52481: After making all local, local proxies of linked 
data get broken after file save and reload.
dfae3de6bdf  Cycles: Fix stack overflow during traversal caused by 
floating overflow  ??? => Check with Maiself?

5c60721c9e3  Fix T51805: Overlapping volumes renders incorrect on AMD GPU
1a76bc7aeb8  Fix T52218: Missing update when reconnecting node
980a8646d8d  Fix T52466: Silence search for button_context menu type.
46997992882  Fix threading conflict when doing Cycles background render
1155fc94fd1  Fix T52454: Crash in DEG_graph_on_visible_update when 
activating scene layer
47d1f67eab9  Fix T52473: blender internal Fresnel and Layer Weight only 
work with linked normal.

146b0c6b049  Fix T52439: Crash after adjusting lenght of hair particles.

2ca1f297486  BMesh: use predictable order for remove-doubles
cb7f1f81606  Docs: BMesh.from_mesh behavior w/ multiple calls
0b5cabdca5d  Fix T51400: Pasting hex code fails
b07dcb8fb06  Missed last commit
b6b27b06711  Fix T52515: Crash on BMesh.to_mesh()
fa365d5f2f9  Fix minor Mesh -> BMesh conversion issues
e4762980840  Docs: rename var and comment how it's used
0b5b464e823  Correction to last fix
76d695f7611  Fix T52490: NDOF orbit doesn't lock in ortho view
3277bd4031d  Fix T52396: Crash loading template w/o config dir
55861cb2346  PyAPI: avoid instantiating args twice in macro
b8d77c44f11  Cleanup: remove space from filenames
46b9f89f5e4  Tests: fix incorrect check for hidden dir
f09dee5aed3  Fix error in PointerProperty argument list
592dd9dea6a  Modify menu from last commit
361c7cbbc57  Fix T52434: Restore mesh center of mass calculation
f6825d333bf  Fix bpy library load: invalid function signature
2ff9c8a3bc5  PyAPI: avoid redundant PyLong_AsLong call

Will backport those already and make first round of tests (and update 
i18n files) in the meanwhile)


Cheers,
Bastien

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Re: [Bf-committers] CMake version bump for blender2.8

[Bastien Montagne]

Hi,

I don’t see why we'd make install_deps also handle custom installation 
of cmake! This is turning a bit (a lot) ridiculous.


CMake 3.0 is **three** years old alreay! I remember we were switching to 
recent versions of CMake much, much more quickly back in the days of 
CMake 2.8 area, as soon as we needed the update, never has been an issue 
then.


And am pretty sure our 5 years old support is meant for hardware, not 
software - especially not compiling/building software! Because 
otherwise, you'd also might ask our current code to support 5 years old 
libraries… this is going pretty much nowhere. Software changes at least 
twice quicker than hardware.


Further more, this is purely a *building* dependency, not a running one. 
Am starting to be a bit tired of getting stuck to years old tools, or 
having to handle their installation ourself (and maintain stupid script 
for way too much distros). Doing that for libraries is already a pain. 
If you do not have the basic minimal knowledge of compiling, to the 
point you are not even able to install modern building tools on the 
purposedly deprecated OS you are using, then by all means, download our 
builds from the buildbot! Sergey spends a lot of time ensuring those 
binaries work on any distro, even rather old ones. Let’s not spend more 
time trying to pretend building a program can be as easy as installing a 
binary package.


So to summarize: I do not understand the issue here.

Cheers,
Bastien

Le 31/08/2017 à 10:38, Dalai Felinto a écrit :

Hi,

Ubuntu 14.04 is "stuck" with CMake 2.8. It's a LTS so they won't
upgrade their CMake. And it's still quite inside our 5 year support
goal.
What exactly do we need from CMake 3.x? If we really need CMake 3.0,
can we at least update install_deps.sh to handle cmake as well?

Regards,
Dalai
--
blendernetwork.org/dalai-felinto
www.dalaifelinto.com


2017-08-20 17:02 GMT+02:00 Jörg Müller :

Hi everyone,

a discussion about our cmake version has started after I merged audaspace
into blender2.8. Audaspace requires cmake 3.0 as opposed to blender's main
cmake file which so far requires cmake 2.8.

Now since a version bump has been in discussion already a year ago according
to Campbell, we think this is a good time to actually do it. Last time it
was postponed because Debian was not ready. So now I had a look at the
current versions of cmake in the major distributions [1]:

ubuntu (17.04) - 3.7.2
ubuntu LTS (16.04) - 3.5.1
debian (stable) - 3.7.2
opensuse (42.3) - 3.5.2
fedora (F26) - 3.8.2
pclinuxos - 3.7.2
centos (6) - 2.8.12 (3.6.1 in EPEL)
arch - 3.8.2
mageia (6) - 3.7.2
slackware (14.2) - 3.5.2
gentoo - 3.7.2

According to this list, pretty much everyone should be able to get at least
cmake 3.5 running. Therefore, I bumped the cmake version to 3.5 which allows
us to use newer cmake features now.

Cheers,
Jörg

[1] https://pkgs.org/download/cmake

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers


___
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers