[meeting minutes] developer meeting on how to integrate Toponaming

Here's the place for discussion related to coding in FreeCAD, C++ or Python. Design, interfaces and structures.
Forum rules
Be nice to others! Respect the FreeCAD code of conduct!
User avatar
M4x
Veteran
Posts: 1449
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2017 9:23 am
Location: Germany

Re: [meeting minutes] developer meeting on how to integrate Toponaming

Post by M4x »

I guess, yes :D

I assume that the provided builds are going to be the result of the branch including the toponaming stuff and the (at that time) current master content.
User avatar
Kunda1
Veteran
Posts: 13434
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2017 9:03 pm

Re: [meeting minutes] developer meeting on how to integrate Toponaming

Post by Kunda1 »

JFYI, there will be a dedicated Snap nightly build dedicated to toponaming (called whatever the toponaming branch will be called). Thanks to @ppd who added this feature to the FreeCAD-snap package
Alone you go faster. Together we go farther
Please mark thread [Solved]
Want to contribute back to FC? Checkout:
'good first issues' | Open TODOs and FIXMEs | How to Help FreeCAD | How to report Bugs
User avatar
onekk
Veteran
Posts: 6098
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2015 7:48 am
Contact:

Re: [meeting minutes] developer meeting on how to integrate Toponaming

Post by onekk »

Kunda1 wrote: Sat Jun 04, 2022 12:55 am JFYI, there will be a dedicated Snap nightly build dedicated to toponaming (called whatever the toponaming branch will be called). Thanks to @ppd who added this feature to the FreeCAD-snap package
It is too work to add also a miniconda environment?

Regards

Carlo D.
GitHub page: https://github.com/onekk/freecad-doc.
- In deep articles on FreeCAD.
- Learning how to model with scripting.
- Various other stuffs.

Blog: https://okkmkblog.wordpress.com/
drmacro
Veteran
Posts: 8806
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2014 4:35 pm

Re: [meeting minutes] developer meeting on how to integrate Toponaming

Post by drmacro »

When the branch is available I guess I'll add it to my build scripts.

I don't have snap on any of my machines and expect I'll keep it that way. 8-)
Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan: Spock: "...His pattern indicates two-dimensional thinking."
User avatar
adrianinsaval
Veteran
Posts: 5534
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2018 5:15 pm

Re: [meeting minutes] developer meeting on how to integrate Toponaming

Post by adrianinsaval »

If looo is planning on providing an appimage it's probably going to be through conda so I expect it will be available there too.

I'll probably provide and archlinux daily build, my setup for daily master builds seems to be working fine except github's servers often fail either on upload (which is weird since it should be happening within their own network) or download
User avatar
Zolko
Veteran
Posts: 2213
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2018 10:02 am

Re: [meeting minutes] developer meeting on how to integrate Toponaming

Post by Zolko »

uwestoehr wrote: Fri Apr 15, 2022 9:52 pm Dear developers, we had a meeting two days ago on how to proceed with the Toponaming integration and the FreeCAD 1.0 development cycle.
...
- this procedure is repeated until it the Toponaming work is done
may I challenge that decision : did you consider solving the toponaming issue for sketches alone first, and THEN for the other things ?

As it happens, Sketcher is quite standalone in the FreeCAD source, AND is the base for nearly all other tasks. Therefore, if we can solve the toponaming problem for sketches, then all users would profit from it, AND this could be a task done earlier that for the full-blown solution. So what I'd like to be considered is to lower the goal for v0.21 to solve the toponaming issue for sketches.
try the Assembly4 workbench for FreCAD — tutorials here and here
User avatar
wandererfan
Veteran
Posts: 6238
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2012 5:42 pm
Contact:

Re: [meeting minutes] developer meeting on how to integrate Toponaming

Post by wandererfan »

Zolko wrote: Fri Jul 15, 2022 3:48 pm As it happens, Sketcher is quite standalone in the FreeCAD source, AND is the base for nearly all other tasks. Therefore, if we can solve the toponaming problem for sketches, then all users would profit from it, AND this could be a task done earlier that for the full-blown solution. So what I'd like to be considered is to lower the goal for v0.21 to solve the toponaming issue for sketches.
Just to clarify, you are proposing handling the situation where sketch A refers to geometry in sketch B only, not situations where something like a pad or a drawing refers to a sketch?

If that is correct, I rather like the idea of getting a smaller piece working first.
User avatar
adrianinsaval
Veteran
Posts: 5534
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2018 5:15 pm

Re: [meeting minutes] developer meeting on how to integrate Toponaming

Post by adrianinsaval »

I would agree if it weren't for the fact that we already have a working implementation for Part and Part Design, if we seriously don't get enough time to get to them I guess we could leave them for next version but as it stands there's no reason to decide right now to leave them out, also the plan already was to merge in stages, first sketcher and Part and later Part Design. Also, a longer dev cycle is an acceptable trade if we actually get toponaming stuff merged.

And if you mean solving the sketcher element/constraint index problem I believe that is pretty independent from this so there is no reason to do one before the other.
User avatar
obelisk79
Veteran
Posts: 1032
Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2020 9:01 pm

Re: [meeting minutes] developer meeting on how to integrate Toponaming

Post by obelisk79 »

I understand its a massive undertaking to review the existing solution for it to be fully accepted, but it would be REALLY nice to not see this tin-can get kicked down the road any further.

It was unofficially announced to be implemented in 0.20. That stalled out
Now it's been officially announced for 0.21/1.0

This is referred to as 'moving the goalposts'.

While I have no control over what the maintainers decide, I do think this would be a huge negative for FreeCAD's reputation. Again, this is particularly true when there's been a well known mitigation for the dreaded TNP issue for several years already.
User avatar
mfro
Posts: 643
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2017 8:15 am

Re: [meeting minutes] developer meeting on how to integrate Toponaming

Post by mfro »

I understood it's @realthunder to decide on what will be merged and how much.

And I think this is the most reasonable approach as he probably knows best about what will be feasible and what not.
Cheers,
Markus
Post Reply