So, as some of you may know already, since December 2014 and my three weeks spent in Amsterdam at BI, I’ve started working on the asset topic.
So far, I did not do anything really directly related to assets (except early designing) – rather, I’ve been improving the editor I intend to use later for assets handling, i.e. the FileBrowser. I have already ported some cleanup/refactor and some minor features (like search field in header, operator to enforce mat/tex/etc. previews generation, …) in master, but most work is still in the dedicated ‘assets-experiments’ git branch, so I’ve made some experimental builds to (try to ) get a bit of testing. In those builds you’ll find:
- Bookmarks and co using UIlists, with possibility to rename and reorganize bookmarks, plus the default features of UILists (filtering by name, and some sorting).
- Possibility to list the whole content of a blend file (in append/link mode) at once (set ‘Recursion Level’ setting to 1), and in any mode, to list several levels of the directory tree in a “flat” mode (including blend files content if relevant, set ‘Recursion Level’ to 2 or more).
- Consequently, possibility to append/link at once several items, either from a same .blend lib, or even from different ones.
- Also, filtering by datablock types was added (so that you can see only e.g. materials and textures from all .blend libs from a same directory…).
- Previews were added to object and group datablocks. Generation of those is handled by a python script (note: only handles BI renderer in this build, Cycles is yet to be added).
Note about previews of datablocks like materials, textures, etc., you have to manually generate them (from File -> Data Previews main menu), and then save the .blend file. On the other side, preview generation of objects and groups work with separated automated tasks ran on selected .blend files (which should rather not be opened at that time). This is quite inconsistent and shall be fixed for sure! On a more technical aspect (though it can also have effects on user PoV):
- Directory listing is now also a background job (like thumbnail generation of images and .blend files), which means listing huge directories, or remote ones, does not lock the UI anymore.
- Previews of datablocks (IDs) are now exposed in RNA, so third party scripts will also be able to generate their own previews if needed. Not all ID types have previews though (only object, group, material, lamp, world, texture and image ones currently), this is likely to change though.
So, as usual, any feedback is more than welcome! Note too that Windows behavior was not tested at all yet (don’t like starting my win WM :/ ), do not expect (too much) issues on this platform, but you never know with Windows. Cheers, and hope that new year will be full of good things for Blender and all of you!
This announcement was written by the FSF's volunteer High Priority Projects Committee.
Nine and a half years ago the first version of the High Priority Free Software Projects (HPP) list debuted with only four projects, three of them related to Java. Eighteen months later, Sun began to free Java users. The current HPP list includes fourteen categories mentioning over forty distinct projects. Computing is ever more ubiquitous and diverse, multiplying challenges to surmount in order for all computer users to be free.
Undoubtedly there are thousands of free software projects that are high priority, each having potential to displace non-free programs for many users, substantially increasing the freedom of those users. But the potential value of a list of High Priority Free Software Projects maintained by the Free Software Foundation is its ability to bring attention to a relatively small number of projects of great strategic importance to the goal of freedom for all computer users. Over the years the list has received praise and criticism -- frankly not nearly enough, given the importance of its aims -- and been rebooted. As the list approaches its tenth year, we aim to revitalize and rethink it, on an ongoing basis.
The first step has been to assemble a committee which will maintain the list, initially composed of the following free software activists: ginger coons, Máirín Duffy, Matthew Garrett, Benjamin Mako Hill, Mike Linksvayer, Lydia Pintscher, Karen Sandler, Seth Schoen, and Stefano Zacchiroli. The committee has drafted this announcement and the following plan.
We need your input! Send your suggestions of projects to email@example.com. Remember, we're looking for projects of great strategic importance to the goal of freedom for all computer users. If you wish, we encourage you to publish your thoughts independently (e.g., on your blog) and send a us a link. Keep in mind that not every project of great strategic importance to the goal of freedom for all computer users will be a software development project. If you believe other forms of activism, internal or external (e.g., making free software communities safe for diverse participants, mandating use of free software in the public sector), are most crucial, please make the case and suggest such a project!
Based on the received input, the current content of the list, and our own contributions, we will publish a substantially revised list and an analysis before LibrePlanet 2015 and expect a lively discussion at that event. If we are successful, we will have the immediate impact of bringing widespread coverage of free software movement strategy and the ongoing impact of garnering substantial attention and new effort for listed projects. (Note that we're also interested in outreach and measurement suggestions. A revised and maintained list is necessary but not sufficient for success.)
Finally, we've already made a few minor changes to the HPP list in order to fix long-standing issues that have been reported in the past. We are looking forward to your feedback at firstname.lastname@example.org as we work on more substantial improvements!About the Free Software Foundation
The Free Software Foundation, founded in 1985, is dedicated to promoting computer users' right to use, study, copy, modify, and redistribute computer programs. The FSF promotes the development and use of free (as in freedom) software -- particularly the GNU operating system and its GNU/Linux variants -- and free documentation for free software. The FSF also helps to spread awareness of the ethical and political issues of freedom in the use of software, and its Web sites, located at fsf.org and gnu.org, are an important source of information about GNU/Linux. Donations to support the FSF's work can be made at https://donate.fsf.org. Its headquarters are in Boston, MA, USA.Media Contacts
Free Software Foundation
+1 (617) 542 5942
As outlined in the previous post there are some technical and feature targets we want to achieve. Recapping here:
1) Performance boost for drawing code. Make sure we use the best drawing method always to pass data to the GPU/Support features that are only available on new OpenGL that will enable better performance and code.
2) Node based material definition for viewport – and definition of a new real – time material system used for rendering (GLSL renderer).
3) Compositing. Includes things such as outlines, depth of field, ambient occlusion, HDR, bloom, flares.
4) Support mobile devices.
What is the state so far:
* Limited compositing (in viewport_experiments branch). When we say limited we mean that the compositor is not tied up to the interface properly, rather it just applies effects to the whole contents of the framebuffer. What we would want ideally, is to not allow UI indicators, such as wires or bones from affecting compositing. This is not too hard to enforce though and can be done similarly to how the current transparency/Xray system works, by tagging wire objects and adding them to be rendered on top of compositing.
* Some parts of our mesh drawing code use Vertex Buffer Objects in an optimal way, others do but still suffer from performance issues by not doing it right, while others do not use it at all.
How will the soc_2014_viewport_fx branch help achieving the targets?
Soc-2014_viewport_fx is providing a layer that can be used to migrate to newer or mobile versions of OpenGL with less hastle, but also tries to enforce some good rendering practices along the way, such as the requirement in modern versions of OpenGL that everything is rendered through Vertex Buffer Objects. Also it removes GLU from the dependencies (since it uses deprecated OpenGL functionality).
Also it sets in place some initial functionality so things can be drawn using shaders exclusively. This is essential if we move to modern or mobile OpenGL versions at some point.
So it mostly helps with targets 1 and 4, but more work will need to be done after merging to realize those targets fully.
At some point, if we want to support modern or mobile OpenGL, we can’t avoid rewriting a big part of our realtime rendering code. The branch already takes some care of that so the branch should be merged and worked on (merging is the first step really), unless we do not really care about supporting those platforms and features.
My estimation, from personal experiments with manual merging, is that it would take about 2-3 weeks of full time work to bring the branch to master-readiness.
Can we focus on some targets immediately?
Yes we can. Some targets such as node materials or compositing, just assume GLSL support in mesh drawing which is yet to be realized in the branch fully so it’s not really blocking their progress. However, getting the branch in as soon as possible will mean less headaches during the merge.
Viewport usability design
Draw modes are getting a little bit unpredictable as to what they enable and are more tied to a real time material definition limited to specular/diffuse/textured. They are also bound to the texture face data structure which is becoming less relevant since we are slowly moving to a material based approach. Often artists have to tweak a number of material and object options to get the visual feedback they need, which can also be frustrating and it is not apparent to new users either. We need a design which allows artists to easily work on a particular workflow while being able to visualize what they want without extensive guesswork of how to visualize this best. Ideally we want to drop draw modes in favour of…
Workflow modes (model, sculpt, paint, animation, game shader design)
Different workflows require different data, and different visualizations. So we can define ‘workflow modes’, which includes a set of shaders and visualization options authored specifically for the current workflow. For instance, a ‘workbench’ mode in edit mode will have a basic diffuse and specular shader with wireframe display options. For retopology, it would make sense to use more minimal, transparent mesh display, like hidden wire, with depth offsetting to avoid intersection artifacts.
Example image of edit mode display options. Some options exist to aid in specific workflows, but this is not so readily apparent
For material definition or texture painting, users might want the full final result or an unshaded version of it for detail tweaking.
Debugging (logic, rigging, etc)
Drawing can offer visual feedback to make it easier for users to examine problematic areas in their scenes. Examples include order of dependency calculation or color-encoded vertex and face counts, or even debug options available to developers.
Easy to switch from one to another, easy to config or script
Using the workflow system, users should be able to get their display to be more predictable. Each workflow mode can expose settings for the shaders or passes used but we can allow more customization than this. A node interface will allow users to request data from blender and write their own shaders to process and visualize these data in their own way. We will follow the OSL paradigm with a dedicated node that will request data from blender in the form of data attribute inputs connected to the node. The data request system is at the heart of the new data streaming design and this means that materials and custom shaders should be able to request such data. Probably even access to real time compositing will be included, though memory consumption is a concern here, and we need to better define how data will be requested in that case.
Modernize! Assume that users will always want the best, most realistic, etc.
With the capabilities modern real time shading offers, we aim to add a third render engine using OpenGL, (next to internal and cycles) which can leverage the capabilities of modern GPUs and tailored to make real time rendering a real alternative for final rendering in blender. A lot of the components are already there, but we can push it further, with shader implementations optimized especially for real time rendering instead of trying to mimic an off-line renderer.
We want to make sure that our material display is pleasing, so we are exploring more modern rendering methods such as physically based shading (a patch by Clement Foucault using notes from Unreal Engine 4 is already considered for inclusion) and deferred rendering.
Needless to say this will also mean improved preview of materials for blender internal and cycles.
BOSTON, Massachusetts, USA -- Friday, November 7, 2014 -- Software Freedom Conservancy and the Free Software Foundation (FSF) today announce an ongoing public project that began in early 2014: Copyleft and the GNU General Public License: A Comprehensive Tutorial and Guide, and the publication of that project in its new home on the Internet at copyleft.org. This new site will not only provide a venue for those who constantly update and improve the Comprehensive Tutorial, but is also now home to a collaborative community to share and improve information about copyleft licenses, especially the GNU General Public License (GPL), and best compliance practices.
Bradley M. Kuhn, President and Distinguished Technologist of Software Freedom Conservancy and member of FSF's Board of Directors, currently serves as editor-in-chief of the project. The text has already grown to 100 pages discussing all aspects of copyleft -- including policy motivations, detailed study of the license texts, and compliance issues. This tutorial was initially constructed from materials that Kuhn developed on a semi-regular basis over the last eleven years. Kuhn merged this material, along with other material regarding the GPL published by the FSF, into a single, coherent volume, and released it publicly for the benefit of all users of free software.
Today, Conservancy announces a specific, new contribution: an additional chapter to the Case Studies in GPL Enforcement section of the tutorial. This new chapter, co-written by Kuhn and Conservancy's compliance engineer, Denver Gingrich, discusses in detail the analysis of a complete, corresponding source (CCS) release for a real-world electronics product, and describes the process that Conservancy and the FSF use to determine whether a CCS candidate complies with the requirements of the GPL. The CCS analyzed is for ThinkPenguin's TPE-NWIFIROUTER wireless router, which the FSF recently awarded Respects Your Freedom (RYF) certification.
The copyleft guide itself is distributed under the terms of a free copyleft license, the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International license. Kuhn, who hopes the initial release and this subsequent announcement will inspire others to contribute to the text, said, "information about copyleft -- such as why it exists, how it works, and how to comply -- should be freely available and modifiable, just as all generally useful technical information should. I am delighted to impart my experience with copyleft freely. I hope, however, that other key thinkers in the field of copyleft will contribute to help produce the best reference documentation on copyleft available."
Particularly useful are the substantial contributions already made to the guide from the FSF itself. As the author, primary interpreter, and ultimate authority on the GPL, the FSF is in a unique position to provide insights into understanding free software licensing. While the guide as a living text will not automatically reflect official FSF positions, the FSF has already approved and published one version for use at its Seminar on GPL Enforcement and Legal Ethics in March 2014. "Participants at our licensing seminar in March commented positively on the high quality of the teaching materials, including the comprehensive guide to GPL compliance. We look forward to collaborating with the copyleft.org community to continually improve this resource, and we will periodically review particular versions for FSF endorsement and publication," said FSF's executive director John Sullivan.
Enthusiastic new contributors can get immediately involved by visiting and editing the main wiki on copyleft.org, or by submitting merge requests on copyleft.org's gitorious site for the guide, or by joining the project mailing list and IRC channel.
copyleft.org welcomes all contributors. The editors have already incorporated other freely licensed documents about GPL and compliance with copyleft licenses -- thus providing a central location for all such works. Furthermore, the project continues to recruit contributors who have knowledge about other copyleft licenses besides the FSF's GPL family. In particular, Mike Linksvayer, member of Conservancy's board of directors, has agreed to lead the drafting on a section about Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike licenses to mirror the ample text already available on GPL. "I'm glad to bring my knowledge about the Creative Commons copyleft licenses as a contribution to improve further this excellent tutorial text, and I hope that copyleft.org as a whole can more generally become a central location to collect interesting ideas about copyleft policy," said Linksvayer.About copyleft.org
copyleft.org is a collaborative project to create and disseminate useful information, tutorial material, and new policy ideas regarding all forms of copyleft licensing. Its primary project is currently a comprehensive tutorial and guide, which describes the policy motivations of copyleft licensing, presents a detailed analysis of the text of various copyleft licenses, and gives examples and case studies of copyleft compliance situations.About the Free Software Foundation
The Free Software Foundation, founded in 1985, is dedicated to promoting computer users' right to use, study, copy, modify, and redistribute computer programs. The FSF promotes the development and use of free (as in freedom) software -- particularly the GNU operating system and its GNU/Linux variants -- and free documentation for free software. The FSF also helps to spread awareness of the ethical and political issues of freedom in the use of software, and its Web sites, located at fsf.org and gnu.org, are an important source of information about GNU/Linux. Donations to support the FSF's work can be made at https://donate.fsf.org. Its headquarters are in Boston, MA, USA.About Software Freedom Conservancy
Software Freedom Conservancy is a not-for-profit organization that promotes, improves, develops and defends Free, Libre and Open Source software projects. Conservancy is home to more than thirty software projects, each supported by a dedicated community of volunteers, developers and users. Conservancy's projects include some of the most widely used software systems in the world across many application areas, including educational software deployed in schools around the globe, embedded software systems deployed in most consumer electronic devices, distributed version control developer tools, integrated library services systems, and widely used graphics and art programs. A full list of Conservancy's member projects is available. Conservancy provides these projects with the necessary infrastructure and not-for-profit support services to enable each project's communities to focus on what they do best: creating innovative software and advancing computing for the public's benefit.Media Contacts
Licensing & Compliance Manager
Free Software Foundation
+1 (617) 542 5942
Karen M. Sandler
Software Freedom Conservancy
+1 (212) 461-3245
The Free Software Foundation Award for the Advancement of Free Software is presented annually by FSF president Richard Stallman to an individual who has made a great contribution to the progress and development of free software, through activities that accord with the spirit of free software.
Last year, Matthew Garrett was recognized with the Award for the Advancement of Free Software for his work to keep "Secure Boot" free software compatible, as well as his other work to make sure that so-called security measures do not come at the expense of user freedom. Garrett joined a prestigious list of previous winners including Dr. Fernando Perez, Yukihiro Matsumoto, Rob Savoye, John Gilmore, Wietse Venema, Harald Welte, Ted Ts'o, Andrew Tridgell, Theo de Raadt, Alan Cox, Larry Lessig, Guido van Rossum, Brian Paul, Miguel de Icaza, and Larry Wall.Award for Projects of Social Benefit
Nominations are also open for the 2014 Award for Projects of Social Benefit.
The Award for Projects of Social Benefit is presented to the project or team responsible for applying free software, or the ideas of the free software movement, in a project that intentionally and significantly benefits society in other aspects of life.
We look to recognize projects or teams that encourage people to cooperate in freedom to accomplish social tasks. A long-term commitment to one's project (or the potential for a long-term commitment) is crucial to this end.
This award stresses the use of free software in the service of humanity. We have deliberately chosen this broad criterion so that many different areas of activity can be considered. However, one area that is not included is that of free software itself. Projects with a primary goal of promoting or advancing free software are not eligible for this award (we honor individuals working on those projects with our annual Award for the Advancement of Free Software).
We will consider any project or team that uses free software or its philosophy to address a goal important to society. To qualify, a project must use free software, produce free documentation, or use the idea of free software as defined in the Free Software Definition. Projects that promote or depend on the use of non-free software are not eligible for this award. Commercial projects are not excluded, but commercial success is not our scale for judging projects.
Last year, the GNOME Foundation's Outreach Program for Women (OPW) received the award, in recognition of its work to involve women (cis and trans) and genderqueer people in free software development. OPW's work benefits society more broadly, addressing gender discrimination by empowering women to develop leadership and development skills in a society which runs on technology. OPW does this critical work using the ideals and collaborative culture of the free software movement.
Other previous winners have included OpenMRS, GNU Health, Tor, the Internet Archive, Creative Commons, Groklaw, the Sahana project, and Wikipedia.Eligibility
In the case of both awards, previous winners are not eligible for nomination, but renomination of other previous nominees is encouraged. Only individuals are eligible for nomination for the Advancement of Free Software Award (not projects), and only projects can be nominated for the Social Benefit Award (not individuals). For a list of previous winners, please visit https://www.fsf.org/awards.
Current FSF staff and board members, as well as award committee members, are not eligible.
The tentative award committee members are: Marina Zhurakhinskaya, Matthew Garrett, Rob Savoye, Wietse Venema, Richard Stallman, Suresh Ramasubramanian, Vernor Vinge, Hong Feng, Fernanda G. Weiden, Harald Welte, Vernor Vinge, Jonas Oberg, and Yukihiro Matsumoto.Instructions
After reviewing the eligibility rules above, please send your nominations to email@example.com, on or before Sunday, November 16th, 2014 at 23:59 UTC. Please submit nominations in the following format:
In the email message subject line, either put the name of the person you are nominating for the Award for Advancement of Free Software, or put the name of the project for the Award for Projects of Social Benefit.
Please include, in the body of your message, an explanation (forty lines or less) of the work done and why you think it is especially important to the advancement of software freedom or how it benefits society, respectively.
Please state, in the body of your message, where to find the materials (e.g., software, manuals, or writing) which your nomination is based on.
Information about the previous awards can be found at https://www.fsf.org/awards. Winners will be announced at an awards ceremony at the LibrePlanet conference, March 21-22 2015, in Cambridge, Massachusetts.About the Free Software Foundation
The Free Software Foundation, founded in 1985, is dedicated to promoting computer users' right to use, study, copy, modify, and redistribute computer programs. The FSF promotes the development and use of free (as in freedom) software -- particularly the GNU operating system and its GNU/Linux variants -- and free documentation for free software. The FSF also helps to spread awareness of the ethical and political issues of freedom in the use of software, and its Web sites, located at fsf.org and gnu.org, are an important source of information about GNU/Linux. Donations to support the FSF's work can be made at https://donate.fsf.org. Its headquarters are in Boston, MA, USA.
More information about the FSF, as well as important information for journalists and publishers, is at https://www.fsf.org/press.Media Contacts
Free Software Foundation
+1 (617) 542 5942
He becomes the eighth director on the FSF's board. The full list of their names and biographies can be found at http://www.fsf.org/about/staff-and-board.
"Matthew Garrett is a truly committed defender of users' freedom. The FSF is fortunate to have him on the board of directors," said FSF president Richard M. Stallman.
A developer specializing in the interactions between operating system kernels, platform firmware and system security, much of Garrett's work has focused on mechanisms for avoiding the oft-suggested tradeoff between user security and user freedom, ensuring that users have ultimate control over which software their devices will and will not run.
FSF executive director John Sullivan said, "Matthew has generously donated his time and expertise to advise the FSF on many issues in recent years, especially Restricted Boot and other disconcerting trends at the intersection of hardware and proprietary software distribution. His willingness to increase his involvement in FSF technical and policy leadership is fantastic news for our members and supporters."
Earlier this year, Garrett won the Free Software Foundation Award for the Advancement of Free Software. He holds a PhD in genetics from the University of Cambridge, and presents frequently around the world on the topic of free software in wider society.
On accepting the invitation to join the board, Garrett said, "It's been almost thirty years since the Free Software Foundation was founded, and in that time free software has become an indispensable part of computer use everywhere, creating an entire new generation of users and developers for whom free software has always been ubiquitous. Unfortunately, the number of threats to user freedom has also increased over that time. The FSF continues to campaign against attempts to restrict the rights of users and developers to be in ultimate control of the software that they use and the devices that they own, and I'm proud to be able to be a part of that."About the Free Software Foundation
More information about the FSF, as well as important information for journalists and publishers, is at https://www.fsf.org/press.Media Contacts
Free Software Foundation
+1 (617) 542 5942
The above image is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 by nekonoir on Flickr.