OSArch Community

Brainstorm on projects we'd like to be able to fund

  1. D

    @duncan said:

    @Nigel @DADA_universe many things are possible. What could be some good ways to make those ideas a reality?

    I would want to look in from the narrow perspective of a Blender For AEC Summit as I'll struggle with the mental bandwidth a larger FOSS for AEC summit would require. I would suggest a one day online event, with pre-booked speakers (30 minutes each) and time dedicated to lightning talks (10 mins each). The summit should be focused on exploring avenues for collaboration amongst developers and other means of optimizing the use of Blender for the AEC industry, so each talk should be stream lined to say: I built this thing, it does this, I need this and that for it to do more, this is my roadmap. So while it would be an extended form of the monthly meetups we used to have, it will not be just about walkthroughs, showcases and definitely not tutorials.

    We could have someone from Blender Foundation speak to a specific issue that's relevant to the subject. If interop with FreeCAD is deemed critical for a reason, we could have someone from FreeCAD sit with a Blender Developer for a panel discussion. That sort of thing. All recorded and posted to the OSArch Youtube channel. Perhaps apt to think of it as the GDC of Blender For AEC, but more from a developer perspective.

    I think the FOSS for OSS Summit on the other hand probably should be less Developer focussed and more user oriented, so walkthrough, showcases and demos would work.

  2. N

    @duncan @DADA_universe could there be a little space for non-coder people to pitch a good idea? Five minute pitch. But not a confrontational 'lions den' idea though more 'Make a wish'

  3. D

    @Nigel said:

    @duncan @DADA_universe could there be a little space for non-coder people to pitch a good idea? Five minute pitch. But not a confrontational 'lions den' idea though more 'Make a wish'

    That's a great idea. Reminiscent of Blender Guru - a Blender power user who is not a developer - putting together and presenting an extensive proposal back then, on how the Blender user experience could be improved, which might or might not have influenced the major upgrade that Blender 2.8 became. Could be super useful in identifying blind spots developers might never be able to see due to their super focus on technical issues.

  4. D

    @DADA_universe said:

    @Nigel said:

    Could be super useful in identifying blind spots developers might never be able to see due to their super focus on technical issues.

    I'm sure @Moult and the other developers are always open to well thought out proposals - it is sometimes the case that one can be busy working on carving the trees and forget to look at the whole forest.

  5. D

    Here's a diagram I made trying to pull the threads together:

  6. N

    Topologic tutorials too

  7. B

    IFC git interface


    [I mentioned this at the meeting last week and realised it wasn't written down anywhere. This is a proposal for somebody else to pick up]

    Firstly, I'm writing this is in the context of Native IFC: blenderbim and other applications read and write IFC files without an import/export process, this behaviour makes storing IFC files in git repositories extremely attractive, it brings efficient storage, full versioning, three-way merging, and collaboration using git-forges like github as a CDE. Read this Native IFC whitepaper for all the gory details.

    Git needs some additional tools to make this experience great, currently if you click on an IFC file in github, your web-browser offers to download the file rather than opening it for viewing (is there a blender command-line option that can be used to associate IFC files with blender? so you can just double-click an IFC file, or click a link, and have it open in blenderbim? that would be nice, I'll add this to the tracker done..).

    An obvious thing you should be able to do with IFC files in online git-repositories is to open them in the browser with IFC.js. There is a proposal somewhere to create an add-on for gitea that would do this. This wouldn't be hard, but one of the advantages of putting BIM data in git is that information can be federated over different services, so what is needed is an IFC.js web-application (or module that all IFC.js applications can use) that can access any online git repository. There are other options, but isomorphic-git is a complete git client written in javascript, it can clone all or part repositories in your browser data store, it seems to be able to do most git stuff that we need. So here are some things that can be done, in order of easiness:

    1. An application where you provide the address of a git repository (either networked or local), the repository is cloned, available IFC files are listed somehow, selecting one opens the HEAD revision as a 3D model.

    2. The same as (1), but with a scrollable changelog, selecting an item from the changelog displays that revision of the model.

    3. Visual diff between revisions. This will only work with Native IFC files, as tracking STEP IDs is easy (see whitepaper above). A visual diff can't be achieved with a single static model, it needs to work something like this: two views are required, a 'before' and 'after', and it should be possible to toggle between them without changing the 3d viewpoint. The 'before' view would show unchanged elements with no colour, modified elements with a colour (green or something), and deleted elements with another colour (red). The 'after' view would show unchanged elements with no colour, modified elements using the same colour as before (green), and added elements with another colour (blue or something). The two views are necessary because a modified element may have moved between revisions, and you can't show this in a static scene. Inspecting changes in non-graphical elements is a whole other problem, a lot of work.

    4. Visual diff between revisions in different repositories.

    5. Three-way merges between branches. Initially this could just indicate if a three-way merge is possible without conflicts. A three-way merge between Native IFC forks is straightforward and deterministic (again, see whitepaper above).

    All the above is needed as an IFC.js web-application, or better as a module that can be plugged-in to any IFC.js application. But, it could also be usefully added into blenderbim, along with a basic commit functionality (creating branches, pushing, cloning etc.. may be better done with a separate git client).

  8. D

    @brunopostle hopefully this will become an official proposal when we get that process up and running :-)

  9. T

    @duncan said:

    @brunopostle hopefully this will become an official proposal when we get that process up and running :-)

    agreed!

    @brunopostle are you open to boiling this down into 200words and posting here?

  10. D
  1. Page 1
  2. 2

Login or Register to reply.