- User Since
- Apr 16 2012, 4:32 PM (253 w, 2 d)
Oct 31 2016
Confirmed in 2.78a
@Peter B (retep.orib) do you recall having issues with copying the settings from a previous release?
Also, is this version 2.78 or 2.78a? (you can check this and the build's hash in the splash screen)
Oct 16 2016
Oct 4 2016
Aug 21 2016
Jul 6 2016
Apr 20 2016
Apr 19 2016
I have no idea how much work is to setup the new skin, vs stripping down our current version to be compatible with the default skin.
That being said, I am all in favor for css tweaks so that it looks like the other blender websites, as long as it is not too much work.
I am not so worried about styling, but about the functionality of the navigation.
Apr 4 2016
Apr 1 2016
Mar 30 2016
Mar 17 2016
Mar 12 2016
Mar 8 2016
Mar 5 2016
Mar 3 2016
Feb 17 2016
Hi Frederick, this is currently not being worked on, but not forgotten either.
I started this project, but meanwhile I got a full time job, which means that my free time for projects is not much.
Anyone is free to grab this task and it has been submitted as a possible google summer of code for this year, so it could be picked up.
Feb 16 2016
Jan 26 2016
Dec 13 2015
Dec 4 2015
Oct 3 2015
The patch looks good to me, with no danger of instability.
Of course old scripts can behave differently, as setting to zero would now work.
Any news from the tests and the pumpkin?
I had a chat about this in IRC, it seems to me that we do want it to be possible to set angular and linear velocity (and more things) to zero.
Simply removing the check could, has mentioned, bring up performance and stability problems.
As for stability, I would suggest add a check if the value that the magnitude is being set to is within epsilon, if so, set to 0 instead epsilon.
For performance, I can't tell just by looking at it :)
What kind of tests are you preparing @Jorge Bernal (lordloki) ? Are they ready and could you share them in the test suite files?
Aug 27 2015
Aug 3 2015
Aug 2 2015
Jun 17 2015
pointed a few typos.
Looking at the original T38030 problem:
Jun 1 2015
Update on this:
I committed the changes to the drawing of the brushes' labels. It's in master now.
I kept the ID template with 4 units of side and the non ID with 5, because Ton said the brushes are meant to be small and not occupy the all screen.
I did not make the labels optional for ID templates, because it is not just a matter of not displaying the text. It would make sense to remove the search too, but that is much too complicated for something without a clear use case.
May 31 2015
- template ID previews: quick fix for buttons region overlapping the search button
- template id previews: changes for consistency with icon views template
- UI: tweaks to ID and non ID preview templates
May 29 2015
May 25 2015
May 24 2015
Should I make the labels for ID previews optional too? to match better the template for non id previews (of course then the default for showing labels in ID prevs is true, and false for non ID).
May 23 2015
changing callback args back to static
May 22 2015
changes as per review. I did nothing about the static
Applying changes, and changing default to true
May 17 2015
May 16 2015
May 14 2015
bisected this to my own commit rB2699866720e75adc2aaba5079f87b705ceda9eab
May 10 2015
May 9 2015
I have detected at least 2 bugs already with this patch that I did not have time to fix.
I spent a day looking into it, but it needs more time, that is why it hasn't gone in yet.
The bug is visible with this file: F17105 after commit 4117efcde301 of this patch, which was originally a fix for that same file.
That commit does change the way a child's rotation is calculated, but I am not sure yet of what is wrong.
May 8 2015
Thank you all!
May 5 2015
May 1 2015
Apr 29 2015
Apr 28 2015
Apr 26 2015
Apr 24 2015
Apr 17 2015
Apr 14 2015
Lukas: bisecting points to rBfe8fad54b16b01b52811fab7b002ff7ea72cb800
Apr 12 2015
Apr 11 2015
Mar 24 2015
Mar 11 2015
Mar 9 2015
Mar 1 2015
@Razvan Cosmin Radulescu (razvanc87) I would also programatically do a grid and place scaled objects there. So all good..
as to have to update the dimensions every frame, are your hexagons changing? It is totally scenario dependent.
I'll get this in when we're back at bcon1 (I was without internet before, sorry about that).
Feb 28 2015
@Sybren A. Stüvel (sybren) I meant storing the dimensions during conversion, because blender does take into account the object space, instead of a bb.
Then for what could change that in runtime... scaling an object? or if it is a softbody or cases that don't even come up to mind easily. So I foresee an easily broken property, without further motivation I'd say not to add.
thumbs up for the patch and thumbs up for sybren's review.
best to move that in before getting in fix-only mode tomorrow at the meeting.
What is the motivation for this? Why would this be useful?
You are returning the dimensions of the bounding box, which is axis aligned and may not correspond to the actual dimensions.
It could be better to store the object's dimensions from Blender during the DataConversion step and try to make sure it doesn't change.
Feb 26 2015
@Jorge Bernal (lordloki) you are updating it in the repo, right? https://svn.blender.org/svnroot/bf-blender/trunk/lib/tests
I started by checking one of the files: add softbody, I took care of removing things that are not being used, you had already taken good care of having the proper engine selected and all. The sphere collision range is a bit off, I was going to fix that, but just selecting it, breaks the demo. I have no time to debug further now, and I have a feeling that this type of thing will be happening a lot. So.. do you want/need further help with this, or I leave it to you?
Feb 21 2015
Sybren should actually know a lot more about this than I do (@Greg Zaal (gregzaal) he is also committing for the BGE and much more knowledgeable on physics).