OpenSCAD WB: Move in to FreeCAD-addons?

[Kunda1]

OpenSCAD looks like a pure python workbench (source)
How do folks feel about moving it out of core and making it an external workbench ?

Do other workbenches rely on it?
I see it has a dependency that comes bundled with it, PLY (Python Lex-Yacc) Version 3.4
Is this dependency something we can also offload?

[keithsloan52]

If it is made into an external workbench then as the author of importCSG.py which started the whole thing off and being somebody who does the occasional fix when bugs are found I would like direct access to any repository that is created on Github for it.

Don't have any time to restructure for addon workbench.

[easyw-fc]

Do other workbenches rely on it?

Draft WB used to include many Openscad functions...
I also found Openscad useful in many occasions both to use its internal functions and for direct modelling...
Moreover many OpenSCAD users are counting on FC to convert OS designs to STEP format...

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

[Kunda1]

If it is made into an external workbench then as the author of importCSG.py which started the whole thing off and being somebody who does the occasional fix when bugs are found I would like direct access to any repository that is created on Github for it.

Don't have any time to restructure for addon workbench.

Of course, just asking here.

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

The idea is to make the FreeCAD footprint smaller, diminish the size of the AppImage. Not trying to rattle cages here.

[vocx]

Draft WB used to include many Openscad functions...

When, what?

I've been looking at Draft for the past year, and I don't remember a single instance of OpenSCAD in the current code.

Draft seems to be entirely based on the functions provided by the Part Workbench, Part_Part2DObject in particular, and some Coin.

[easyw-fc]

The idea is to make the FreeCAD footprint smaller, diminish the size of the AppImage. Not trying to rattle cages here.

OpenSCAD folder:
16 items, totalling 1,3MB
and this is including OpenSCAD dependencies.
This seems a very little gain for removing a standard wb widely used.

Draft WB used to include many Openscad functions...

When, what?
I've been looking at Draft for the past year, and I don't remember a single instance of OpenSCAD in the current code.
Draft seems to be entirely based on the functions provided by the Part Workbench, Part_Part2DObject in particular, and some Coin.

you have searched too little.
Probably you have joined this forum too early to have a long memory of FC code.

Anyway the point is why removing a used WB out of FC code? Who is going to take care of its code then? And for which advantage?

[vocx]

you have searched too little.

I would appreciate a proper answer, not just an indirect reference. Also, you say "used to". Does that mean OpenSCAD is not used any more in Draft?

Anyway the point is why removing a used WB out of FC code? Who is going to take care of its code then? And for which advantage?

I think the point Kunda tries to make is that OpenSCAD doesn't seem to be a widely used workbench. It is certainly not developed a lot now. It provides some backend functions that not many people use in workbenches like Arch, TechDraw, or PartDesign, which are in fact used by many. So, removing OpenSCAD won't necessarily save space, but it will result in a cleaner, less cluttered FreeCAD. Externalizing Ship and Plot has the same effect. These workbenches that aren't in heavy development can live outside the main source tree, and be installed separately if required. And keithsloan seems to be willing to maintain OpenSCAD, so why not?

[easyw-fc]

that OpenSCAD doesn't seem to be a widely used workbench.

This is just an opinion.

OpenSCAD is a widely used sw.
OpenSCAD WB is the only option to get STEP file format for OpenSCAD file format.
OpenSCAD WB is a connection between a widely used CAD sw and FreeCAD.
Those are just facts.

These workbenches that aren't in heavy development can live outside the main source tree, and be installed separately if required. And keithsloan seems to be willing to maintain OpenSCAD, so why not?

An external user willing to maintain an external WB means nothing compared to have the code in the main branch. The user can maintain, if needed, the WB also if it is inside the main branch.

Anyway I don't see any point/gain in defeaturing FreeCAD from useful WBs. And that's for sure my opinion.

[wmayer]

Do other workbenches rely on it?

Yes, the Mesh wb uses the boolean operations of OpenSCAD because they are quite robust. The Mesh module has its own implementation of boolean operations too but they are quite fragile and fail in many cases.

Although the OpenSCAD wb has no active maintainer I would still leave it in master.

However, Ship and Plot are orphaned now for many years and there are probably not that many people using it. So, I think they should go to FreeCAD-addons.

[keithsloan52]

Although the OpenSCAD wb has no active maintainer I would still leave it in master.

Well I do try and fix when people raise bugs.