In D5119#116429, @Campbell Barton (campbellbarton) wrote:

This would re-introduce the issue from T60777.
For this to work we'll need to add a new flag to detect 'Repeat Last', since this is a special case, unlike adjusting-the-last-operator repeat, the context may be different each time and we can't rely on property SKIP_SAVE not to store values for re-use.

Committed alternate fix rB1c94030238bb37918c4cd3256e0acb0b7099579d

This would re-introduce the issue from T60777.

hi @Paul Kotelevets (1D_Inc), great story, Thanks, it gives me a greater understanding of your F2. I have similar stories from the old days and the new. Bart is a great guy, he helped me with addons in the very beginning, donating much time to Blender.
In the case of SmartF I was also looking for a maintainer as I was unaware of your F2 updates and continued maintenance. I'm always on the lookout for active developers, especially during big changes like 2.8.
Addons like bsurfaces, f2, looptools, mesh edit tools content, all date back some years, it's a testament to their usefulness that they always get attention at the right times.

Well, yes, that's one of actual problems in CG Workflow design.
Usability is not equal to strong math, but strong math can be reached more easy.

I can't address @Paul Kotelevets (1D_Inc) issues because making things with Blender is just a hobby for me.
I just saw an addon that needed to be updated, didn't read the conversation about being the substitute for F2.
It would be great to have both, but i guess you want to have the only minimum necesary addons, so there can only be one?

I've uploaded a possible solution: D5094

Personally, from entire SmartF I mostly like "lock of backwards fake faces"
https://youtu.be/WFC8UvY-9Hk?t=348
I was planning to make such lock, but at workflow scale it suddenly was not disturbing or harmful enough, so it was left until better times, and more urgent scripts took priority.
Maybe we will do it once.

@Paul Kotelevets (1D_Inc) points taken. I'm just trying to solve this task and try to keep the addons repo up to date. I'm not an expert modeller, so my tests are basic.
Now that I know of the new F2 version I'll have to address that. I will create another task for F2 addon.
@CansecoGPC (CansecoGPC) @Duyun Ivan (DIV) sorry, this is on hold again. it's up to you guys to decide how you want to proceed. Can you address some of the issues raised by 1D_Inc?
I did think with the panel it offered on the fly options, which is good for users who might just be learning what the options do, or occasionally use the tool.
Are the issues that led to the writing of Smartf addressed in the new version of f2?
Which functions in Smartf differ from f2? If it's only a matter of adding a couple of new functions and an ui to f2 now?
Let me know what you think and would like to see happen.

For example, this is how workflow research looks like - a timelapse video of the process of building a real complex model is performed for further analysis.
This allows to check the effectiveness of the methods and concepts used in the production at entire workflow scale.
At the moment, entire model can be made without any kind of panels and prefrences, also there are almost no errors, no misclickings, no fake faces, no checker fillings... workflow is clean, straightforward and smooth.
So what is the problem that you want to solve?

I has got two questions - does SmartF have user base, and what situations it is useful.

The issue is/was: It's difficult to justify 2 addons that do essentially the same function being in Blender. Both addons have a user base, both can useful in different situations and provide elements each other does not. They also use the same hotkey so there's the potential for key map issues.
As we need to solve this I think the only way is this.
1/ Update F2 to the version here: https://github.com/Cfyzzz/Other-scripts/blob/master/f2%2028%201-8-4.py
2/ Add SmartF as provided by @CansecoGPC (CansecoGPC) with a warning not to enable F2 addon

Maybe it would be better to have them separated

I could add it as an update for you but we prefer for the new Authors/maintainers to be accountable for their own addons. Please let us know how you wish to proceed.

As CG workflow desiger, I am an author of concept of F2 tool. I work with different local python developers, ordering different concepts of tools to them, so development of F2 is under my maintain, but was written by several developers.
Yes, I would like it to be updated from Cfyzzz Github (at least once since, probably, 2014). That would be awesome.
F2 2.8 version

Changed Panel from it's own tab to Edit and panel name to SmartF.
Only call prop imports needed.

In T51049#700287, @Brendon Murphy (meta-androcto) wrote:

hi, thanks very much, Can you please check with nightly builds to make sure code is working correctly, I don't see any issue, but it's worth regular checking.
Have you looked at https://wiki.blender.org/wiki/Tools/Git and https://wiki.blender.org/wiki/Developer_Intro/Overview ? Are you prepared to maintain the addon within Blender through the 2.8 series? Let me know so we can look at your access to the addons repository.

hi @Paul Kotelevets (1D_Inc),
Thank you for your detailed response, we appreciate your time and input on this. I consider you the expert on the f2 addon functionality.

Hi there. Thanks for inviting.

hi, thanks very much, Can you please check with nightly builds to make sure code is working correctly, I don't see any issue, but it's worth regular checking.
Have you looked at https://wiki.blender.org/wiki/Tools/Git and https://wiki.blender.org/wiki/Developer_Intro/Overview ? Are you prepared to maintain the addon within Blender through the 2.8 series? Let me know so we can look at your access to the addons repository.
There could be a couple more things to do here. I've had discussion with @Paul Kotelevets (1D_Inc) and he's still advocating the f2 addon. Given it's included in smartf we maybe could address the issue further.

For active element and 3D cursor pivot point, simply following the setting seems ok. For the default median center, I'd rather it do something a bit smarter since that's basically never where you want the spin center to be.

All I’m saying is that it should simply follow the pivot point setting. Different pivots may be appropriate in different situations, so hardcoding it to 3D cursor isn’t great.

Using the active element for all pivot point settings except 3D cursor would be an improvement for vertex and edge select mode I think.

@Brecht Van Lommel (brecht) Just FYI, this is by default what happens with default cube using 3D Cursor:

For active element pivot point I think it's fine to default to the active element as spin center. But I would be nice that if you go into edit mode, select one face of the cube, and activate the spin tool, drag the (+) button, it actually does something useful.

@Brecht Van Lommel (brecht) Luckily we have a pivot point option called Active Element, which is most useful for spin:

I think it would make sense if the default spin center is derived from the selection without taking the 3D cursor into account. But not necessarily at the center of the selection since that makes the tool pretty confusing with the default pivot point setting. I'm not sure what the right formula is though.

You very often want to spin around a vertex. This would be trivial if you could set the Pivot Point to Active Element.

Can confirm the behavior, same happens in 2.79.
I think this will go for the boundingbox of the entire object in that case, will check...

Just chiming making flat objects then making them 3dish in blender 2.8 is a huge mess.

I can confirm this bug! Its very annoying. But it occours only, if faces are smooth shaded. If there are flat shaded, it works.