I include the add-on Archimesh and it does not appear anywhere, as if I did not include it at all.

Couldn't you just check if there is a local armature with the same name? That would make more sense to me than just throwing a bunch of letters onto names even when no local armatures with the same name exist.

No bug here, that is expected behavior (we need unique names, and nothing can ensure us there is not a local armature with same name too).

Thats sad. So what can we do to transfer meshes between apps without data loss? Can we fix collada exporter?

@Amir (Warrior) nothing prevents you from using system python instead of 'own' blender one, just ensuer you build with system python, disable the WITH_PYTHON_INSTALL build options, and blender will use system python, and you can use any module installed there. That would be by far the simplest solution (especially on linux, where valid system python should nearly always be available).

@Brecht Van Lommel (brecht) I think I fixed it actually but this is not a permanent solution and I'm not work if Armory is going to work properly this way.

@Brecht Van Lommel (brecht) No it shows me the following error although I ran the code above to install it.

I'm not sure I understand, doesn't bpy.ops.wm.addon_enable(module='armory') work, you just have to call it every time?

@Brecht Van Lommel (brecht) I think it's totally understandable to assume that people who compile Blender as Python module would ONLY need to use the "factory setting" functionalities, but it's not a good idea not to provide an option for others to be able to install addons :(

@Bastien Montagne (mont29) I don't have an issue running Blender with the -b flag but the reason that I'm compiling Blender as Python module is that I have many other packages that I'm using in my project and things are integrated. I do import pytorch, import cv2 etc and it's not possible to disentangle things. On the other hand, I don't think it is possible to compile a heavy code base like PyTorch and add its module into the internal Python that Blender comes with.

@Amir (Warrior) no, blender-as-module is a library, not an application. Blender with no GUI is… Blender with no GUI (run from commandline with -b option, you can even build it with WITH_HEADLESS option to actually have no available GUI at all).

@Campbell Barton (campbellbarton) @Brecht Van Lommel (brecht) But it doesn't make sense not to be able to install addons if you're using the Python module. The Python module should be Blender with no GUI in my opinion and there shouldn't be any difference. Would you agree with that?
But still, is there a way to manually load a userpref.blend file with the Python module? How can one install addons when using the Python module?

OK, so I consulted with a Max plugin developer related to this issue.
He told me that the order of vertex IDs determines the triangulation of a mesh with ngons, which is probably related to the Max internal workflow where in Poly mode the invisible tris are there (could be switched on for the viewport) to see topology.

The Python module indeed always starts with "factory settings" by design. This is what you would normally expect from a programming API I think.

@Campbell Barton (campbellbarton) will know more here, but am pretty sure blender-as-py-module does not handle at all user preferences and such? That would not make much sense at least, imho…

I have found a few examples of 3DS files at archive3d.net that don’t import properly into Blender. Here’s one

Resolved in Blender Cloud add-on 1.9.2.

Resolved in Blender Cloud add-on 1.9.2.

Dear Bastien, if I remember correctly when this problem firstly appeared it was checked with Max, Modo, C4D and Blender (with the help with some friends). And if I remember correctly only Blender exports were unusable in other apps related to this issue (when issues came up, the user was notified, at least at export time, so it was easy to avoid them).
So they somehow managed to solve it (I will recheck it if I will have time).
I would be happy with at least a warning pop-up that something is not OK from topology aspect, because it is a 'flying blind' case now.

@Brecht Van Lommel (brecht) @Sergey Sharybin (sergey) @Campbell Barton (campbellbarton) if you have anything to add here (or happen to know how Max & co handle tessellation)?

No, tessellation algorithm is assumed to be smart enough to find the 'inner' side of the edges, there are basic mathematical/geometrical ways to do so. As long as there is no intersection of edges inside of the same polygon, there should really not be any issue…

'It simply looks like tessellation of Max (and others) is more limited than the one we have in Blender'

'We just export polygons as they are in Blender, nothing else.'

Yes, that what we call the 'tessellation' process. But that is defined by the application, on runtime and for displaying (OpenGL) only, absolutely not by the polygon (mesh data) itself. Again, a polygon only stores the list of its border edges, never any 'inner' tessellated edge. It simply looks like tessellation of Max (and others) is more limited than the one we have in Blender… Maybe they need/add extra meta-information to their polygons to solve concave tessellation well, I don’t know… But that’s not a blender bug/issue at all.

As far as I know triangulation always happens, but it is not 'viewable'.

Well, we do not triangulate anything when exporting from Blender (OBJ as the option to triangulate faces, but it’s disabled by default). We just export polygons as they are in Blender, nothing else. So I definitively do not think issue is on Blender side here, looks more like some tessellation issue for concave polygons on Max side, to me… As if it had specific requirements about how concave polygons have to be layed out or something.

Dear Bastien,

We do not accept bug reports about third-party add-ons not distributed with Blender, those shall be reported to the add-on's author(s).

Don’t think we can do anything here, that totally looks like an issue in reading FBX from maya and others (maybe even a bug in FBX 'official' library itself?).

Thanks, here it is:

Thanks for the report but there is no information in here. If you think you found a bug, please fill in all the requested information. If this is a user support question, try one of the community websites:
https://www.blender.org/community/

Please follow the bug reporting template and provide all the requested information:
https://developer.blender.org/maniphest/task/edit/form/2/

Thanks for the report, but any issues with the Renderman addon should be reported to them, since we the Blender projects does not maintain it:
ttps://github.com/prman-pixar/RenderManForBlender

One last thing on this - I was wrong in believing I used a beta version of Blender 2.79b the version is actually 2.79.4, which has your node enabled. I also believe it is a cuda driver problem I'm having and not a bug in the program.
I downloaded the beta 2.8 and it is - HORRIBLE. Not only are the shortcuts different and the layout switched and shifted around, the rendering is horrendous. I have not played around with it too much just tested some files and they all look bad when rendered. As of now I don't know what needs to be changed in order to make old files look like they should...
Meanwhile I'm solving my problem by using the 2.79.4 Version, which does crash when trying to render animation but does not crash when just rendering a single, so I "simply" render each image manually, safe it and that will give me my short animation.
I saw your node in the 2.8 Beta Version, which is great but the rest was so bad - I don't have time to deal with all the extra confusion - we'll see what's going to happen with it.
Best,
Jens

Real quick - I just realized that you are the creator of the Principled Volume Shader - AWESOME! LOVE IT!

Hi Brecht,
thanks very much for answering so quickly.

Possible solutions are:

• Upgrade your 10.8 installation to a newer macOS version.
• Replace principled volume with a custom volume shader with volume scatter and absorption nodes.
• If you believe the crash is a bug (and not due to running out of memory), report it with a .blend file attached so we can investigate.

Most likely same as T56750?