Page 3 of 3

Re: Preview: Link, stage two, API groundwork

Posted: Mon Jul 31, 2017 7:49 pm
by realthunder
Jee-Bee wrote:
Mon Jul 31, 2017 7:41 pm
realthunder wrote:
Mon Jul 31, 2017 7:19 pm
Err... what is PDN?
Part design next or better what is in fact current part design of 0.17 ;)
Right, I've looked at the code. The change required is a bit more involved than I'd like to get into now. I did partial porting of Part WB to support link as a demonstration (to the developer) of what kind of change is required.

Re: Preview: Link, stage two, API groundwork

Posted: Tue Aug 01, 2017 5:56 am
by ickby
You see, I started working on Link to solve one problem with geo group, that is, one object can only belong to one group at any time. That is going to seriously affect the assembly use case,
Really? We discussed this now over multiple days, and you still write this word censored? I'm starting to get really frustrated. I mean what do you think, we worked on this stuff for so long and just made an stupid oversight? That we never thought about assembly usecase and how they should work? Come on! Out architecture is thought through, and it will work, no matter if you like it or not, or if you wish it to work differently. And I hate to bring it to you, your link concept is also nothing you invented, it was decided to go for such functionality long before you even started working on FreeCAD. Damn, it even is absolutely standart to use this kind of things. You made an implementation, that is very good, but nothing groundbraking. So please stop the "Save the world" attidude.

And now I'm going out of this discussion, I really need to calm down for a few days.

Re: Preview: Link, stage two, API groundwork

Posted: Tue Aug 01, 2017 6:19 am
by realthunder
ickby wrote:
Tue Aug 01, 2017 5:56 am
You see, I started working on Link to solve one problem with geo group, that is, one object can only belong to one group at any time. That is going to seriously affect the assembly use case,
Really? We discussed this now over multiple days, and you still write this word censored? I'm starting to get really frustrated. I mean what do you think, we worked on this stuff for so long and just made an stupid oversight? That we never thought about assembly usecase and how they should work? Come on! Out architecture is thought through, and it will work, no matter if you like it or not, or if you wish it to work differently. And I hate to bring it to you, your link concept is also nothing you invented, it was decided to go for such functionality long before you even started working on FreeCAD. Damn, it even is absolutely standart to use this kind of things. You made an implementation, that is very good, but nothing groundbraking. So please stop the "Save the world" attidude.

And now I'm going out of this discussion, I really need to calm down for a few days.
Wow, I didn't expect that. I am sorry if I give you that kind of impression, which is definitely not my intention, at all. When I said 'I started working on Link to solve one problem with geo group', what I am referring to is this thread. Anyone reading that thread will know I started out this after discussion with you guys. And you know this, right? I thought I've shown my respect to you by never really touching your work on geo group, only suggestion of changes. I go extra miles to work around the problem I had with geo group, until it cannot be continued any more. You do realize that the re-grouping stuff currently in the master breaks Link because it links to other object by nature. Sure, it can be easily fixed by excluding it from re-grouping, if you approve, that is. But then we still have the problem of the Link bringing all kinds of children that may already be in other groups.

Re: Preview: Link, stage two, API groundwork

Posted: Wed Aug 02, 2017 2:50 pm
by triplus
realthunder wrote:
Mon Jul 31, 2017 4:53 pm
Well, adding the local coordinate concept into the mix is going to make everything complex for everyone, even the developers, look how long it took to get where we are.
Local coordinate system concept was already added to the mix. And at some point in the future generalization of the concept (contrary to the current approach) will likely need to happen. As there will likely be natural and persistent pressure from developers/users in some form to do that. But not in FreeCAD 0.17 development cycle.
ickby wrote:
Tue Aug 01, 2017 5:56 am
I'm starting to get really frustrated.
Through the discussions i feel we learned a lot. From FreeCAD 0.17 development cycle point of view i do agree adding things to the mix will likely only result in frustration. Better strategy therefore is to help get FreeCAD 0.17 released as is.

P.S. And for everything else to happen in down-stream branches to get some head start and to be discussed early in FreeCAD 0.18 development cycle.

Re: Preview: Link, stage two, API groundwork

Posted: Sat Apr 27, 2019 9:02 am
by tmolteno
ickby wrote:
Tue Aug 01, 2017 5:56 am
You see, I started working on Link to solve one problem with geo group, that is, one object can only belong to one group at any time. That is going to seriously affect the assembly use case,
Really? We discussed this now over multiple days, and you still write this word censored? I'm starting to get really frustrated. I mean what do you think, we worked on this stuff for so long and just made an stupid oversight? That we never thought about assembly usecase and how they should work? Come on! Out architecture is thought through, and it will work, no matter if you like it or not, or if you wish it to work differently. And I hate to bring it to you, your link concept is also nothing you invented, it was decided to go for such functionality long before you even started working on FreeCAD. Damn, it even is absolutely standart to use this kind of things. You made an implementation, that is very good, but nothing groundbraking. So please stop the "Save the world" attidude.

And now I'm going out of this discussion, I really need to calm down for a few days.
I was horrified to read this. I wonder whether the writer realizes that they use 'Our' in such an arrogant way. Sadly, you diminish not only yourself, but also the whole freecad project. Frankly I'm disgusted, I remain hopeful that freecad will eventually grow up and get assembly functionality, but with defensive, insecure behaviour like this I fear that the only way this will happen is if the project is forked.

Re: Preview: Link, stage two, API groundwork

Posted: Sat Apr 27, 2019 4:49 pm
by kkremitzki
tmolteno wrote:
Sat Apr 27, 2019 9:02 am
I was horrified to read this. I wonder whether the writer realizes that they use 'Our' in such an arrogant way. Sadly, you diminish not only yourself, but also the whole freecad project. Frankly I'm disgusted, I remain hopeful that freecad will eventually grow up and get assembly functionality, but with defensive, insecure behaviour like this I fear that the only way this will happen is if the project is forked.
I think your fears are overblown and the fact that you had to resurrect a 2-years-dead thread as supporting evidence reinforces it. Your continued agitations for a fork are definitely off-topic and bordering on trolling to me, why don't you try doing something constructive?

Re: Preview: Link, stage two, API groundwork

Posted: Sun Apr 28, 2019 11:33 am
by Kunda1
Agree wholeheartedly with @kkremitzki
This type of agitation is IMO tragic because although there has been concern (to say the least & spoken about ad nauseum) about the importance of merging, it is subject to causing more rift-like behavior. OP could show more tact next time before posting inflammatory narrative.