OpenSCAD WB: Move in to FreeCAD-addons?

[keithsloan52]

Leaving it in master means that import of SCAD and CSG files is supported, otherwise people have got to discover that one needs to install the workbench to have these import filetypes supported.

As easyw-fc says FreeCAD is currently the only software that will allow people who create designs using OpenSCAD to then create STEP versions. I know of a number of people who develop 3D models of components for KiCad do so via OpenSCAD programs and conversion via FreeCAD.

I feel that one of the benefits of the OpenSCAD workbenchs support of SCAD and CSG files, meant that a lot of OpenCascade/OCC bugs got fixed. Sometimes things end of crashing and not be reproducible, where as opening a SCAD/CSG file meant some complicated graphics
operations were repeatable. I know @shoogen got a lot of bugs fixed in the underlying graphics library. We might even benefit if somebody
put together a suite of CSG files that acted as a test case.

If somebody restructured for an addin workbench then maintaing without the need to build FreeCAD would be a benefit.

[sgrogan]

Leaving it in master means that import of SCAD and CSG files is supported, otherwise people have got to discover that one needs to install the workbench to have these import filetypes supported.

This is a very good point.
It doesn't have to be all or nothing.
A non-gui module could remain in the master source tree and the WB(gui) could become an addon.

[easyw-fc]

If somebody restructured for an addin workbench then maintaing without the need to build FreeCAD would be a benefit.

OpenSCAD is already a full python code Mod addon.
So if someone wants to restructure or enhance it, can already work without re-build FC from source.
Close FC, modify the python code in the Mod OpenSCAD folder, restart FC and check the result.
No need to duplicate the effort to create an extra WB. Simply play with the existing one

[yorik]

For me the main reason to decide is practicity: Will it be more practical to maintain inside or outside?

If Keith is the main maintainer (or let's say the person who most maintains it ATM), basically the main decision is his... There are pros and cons, as always. Being inside the core code means others can more easily be bothered by a bug and fix it. Outside also (sometimes) means it's less daunting for new people to approach and submit a fix. I myself have no strong opinion on the openSCAD case.

I wouldn't worry too much about things like having built-in support for file formats, because we can make the addons system evolve much more yet, for ex, when users select an openscad file, you'd get a message telling you to install the required addon, also allow users to bulk-install a list of addons at FreeCAD install, and other things like that.

[triplus]

...But why do you want to move this out of FC core?

Some feel that the workbench list is too long, and if it would be shorter, that i guess would be more tidy:

https://forum.freecadweb.org/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=39940



Personally i don't care all that much, anymore, as i will manage. What i do know is a bit of a problem, people tend not to use FreeCAD functionality, not made available by default. Therefore our current model is i guess lacking, as currently a whole lot of functionality is developed outside FreeCAD source code and a whole lot of people won't ever use it. Just because it's not available by default.

[Kunda1]

I noticed something about OpenSCAD and how it's represented in the user.cfg file.
When you open OpenSCAD for the first time it will create a

Code: Select all

          <FCParamGroup Name="OpenSCAD">
            <FCText Name="openscadexecutable">/usr/bin/openscad</FCText>
          </FCParamGroup>

And then, if you haven't opened the Part WB before, it will also add

Code: Select all

          <FCParamGroup Name="Part">
            <FCParamGroup Name="General"/>
            <FCParamGroup Name="IGES"/>
            <FCParamGroup Name="STEP"/>
          </FCParamGroup>

That mirrors what was said previously in the thread.