I’m a Blender user and I’m a part of the Blender community. I must say I’m happy to use the channels provided by the developers to get information on Blender’s future and to communicate my opinions. It is very easy to contact the developers and discuss whatever issues there are with Blender. However, it’s nice when you don’t call them tyrants or imply that they have bad personal traits or demand things from them. Basically, to treat the developers (you know, actual people) like they are people. It goes a long way towards getting your voice heard.
firefox.jco, your talk is nonsense. You have been provided with ample evidence of how blender developers are communicating. Some developers even lower themselves to communicating with users on these terrible forums here. If you want to talk to developers, you can go on IRC and the mailing lists and you will most likely get a response. I hope you don’t do that though, because it’s a waste of time for them to read your bullshit.
What are you contributing to the blender project? You are owed nothing, but you have the nerve to talk about tyranny. Where did you get the idea that every user is supposed to have a say in the development of free software? That is nonsense. You keep talking about “we”, but really you just speak for yourself, don’t you? If you’re really so oppressed, why don’t “you all” form an interest group and hire some developers of your own? Create your own version of Blender! That’s the freedom the GPL is talking about.
[QUOTE = BeerBaron; 2829581] firefox.jco, your talk is nonsense. You have been provided with ample evidence of how blender developers are communicating. Some developers even lower themselves to communicating with users on these terrible forums here. If you want to talk to developers, you can go on IRC and the mailing lists and you will most likely get a response. I hope you don’t do that though, because it’s a waste of time for them to read your bullshit.
What are you contributing to the blender project? You are owed nothing, but you have the nerve to talk about tyranny. Where did you get the idea that every user is supposed to have a say in the development of free software? That is nonsense. You keep talking about “we”, but really you just speak for yourself, don’t you? If you’re really so oppressed, why don’t “you all” form an interest group and hire some developers of your own? Create your own version of Blender! That’s the freedom the GPL is talking about. [/ QUOTE]
If this is * That’s the freedom the GPL is talking about, why can not I go on IRC talk to the devs, although I have to talk … are ‘nonsense’ … as ‘their’ …
Oh yes, I suggest learning to read: did not call the dev nor BF tyrants, was referiando me this: 'So in the end I do not need to opine on the Blender development only because They do not encode but’m just a mere postulant the artist? I have to accept silent others do for me?
This is not freedom, it is tyranny. ’
Remember, … is all a matter of perspective. Each has its needs. Impose is not the answer.
Ah, yes,. and is less xenophobic, after all you could also hire devs of your own and desenvovlver your own private version of Blender. * It is the freedom that the GPL is talking.
There’s enough channels and transparency when it comes to the BF in my opinion, they even published the roadmap of planned projects for 2015.
The issue one might see though is that most developers see this forum as ‘noise’, but among all of the heated debates, rabid disagreements, and the “my way or the highway” personal agendas for Blender held by some, then they have some valid points.
If you want more developers to start posting here, then there must be evidence that this forum can actually produce constructive discussions in terms of what the community wants to see in Blender and how to deal with shortfalls.
It seems like there is an awful lot of unsupported speculation in this thread.
Just because it’s a standard response doesn’t mean it’s inaccurate. I’m sure anyone who has had to sift through a stack of resumes understands throwing out the applicants that didn’t follow directions as a first pass.
For what it’s worth this is the rejection PCL got.
We had almost 420 applications this year and were only able to accept 137 orgs (less than 1/3) so we had to say no to many orgs. Because you have participated 3 times in the last 4 years we didn’t think it would be a hardship to take a year off. This is the primary reason you were rejected. We do hope you will apply again in the future.
http://www.pcl-developers.org/GSOC-15-tp5709771p5709799.html
Which sounds like the same one Mozilla got:
The simplest explanation would seem to be that Google has specific criteria for accepting candidates (surprise, surprise) and candidates that are rejected because they don’t meet those criteria are sent similar explanations.
What does blender need at the moment?
Nothing - It’s Fing amazing, the only thing limiting me on the modeling side… is my skills.
I have not found something I could not do because blender was in the way… it’s either me, or my hardware…
The bge on the other hand… it just can’t display as many polygons as other systems, and has a hiccup here and there with logic,
all in all I would say both pieces of software do exactly what they should…
However, producing games in the blender editor is familiar, amazing, and I can’t drop it.
Blender and the BGE is my Drug,
How would you improve it?
Better faster, stronger harder.’
NOW GO!
code your face off for blender for free!
The Linux Foundation being rejected (or maybe they didn’t apply?) is the most surprising to me. It usually attracts a lot of students.
Maybe they were just wanting to give some of the non-powerhouse projects some focus for a change; still some odd choices who got in and who didn’t though. Then again, Google is the company that did the G+ thing which still has my YouTube account all screwed up, so I suppose their decision making probably shouldn’t surprise me.
Not to derail the conversation… but as someone who actively uses Google products, including G+, I think it is awesome and is the best social resource. The youtube integration is something I have been waiting on for a long time, (still not 100% integrated yet though). To each their own, I guess.
The problem is that there are some that do NOT accept differing views, has its obtuse point of view as valid only.
As for whether the transpartência, what I really wanted dizeré the BF should have a centralized location parea share their work. Why not do in their official page, with a specific call highlighted so that it is not lost in the crowd of news?
Why admit, be panning information is somewhat awkward.
I used to feel that the devs never listened to my suggestions, but I suppose I came to a realization that if I never get the results I want, maybe I needed to change my approach. Rather than trying to get developers to work on things I felt were the most important, I just started giving feedback on whatever the devs were already working on. Nearly immediately suggestions I made started getting committed.
I think a big reason some areas of Blender work so clumsy is because when they’re in active development a large chunk of the artists don’t give much quality feedback. Most threads here intended to get feedback wind up with people trying to get the developer to work on something else they feel should be of higher priority. Just some thoughts I’ve had.
Well, this thread derailed fast.
You have quite some nerve there, telling people to learn to read in a sentence chock-full of gibberish.
I have ‘You have quite some nerve there’, that is tiring the attitude of these assumptions trolls who think they own the BF to decide what should or should not be done to improve Blender in your narrow view, even if it harms the other users of the suite.
I apologize if I offended anyone before, but unfortunately the heat of the discussion is leading many to that side.
If derailed was due to some who are owners of the truth and want to silence the other at any cost.
Perhaps the best solution is close the same topic, so no one is offended.
First of all, half the stuff you write is completely incomprehensible, because it’s translated by a computer. The other half is easy to misunderstand.
I did learn how to read (and write) English, how about you do the same?
I don’t know who these trolls and tyrants are that are oppressing you. You can leave your opinion here, just like everyone else. If my opinion is that your opinion is bullshit, I can say so. I didn’t deny you your opinion. You have nothing to complain about. Blender developers don’t have to listen to either of us. I didn’t ask the BF to do anything and neither should you. You’re unsatisfied with BF communication, despite everything that is already being done? Fine, complain about it. Nobody cares. However, if you start talking about “tyranny”, you’ll just look like an idiot.
I’ve expressed no particular views for a rather long while. How do you know they’re narrow? 
Putting my own personal opinion aside, I have heard with my own ears other people say similar things to what firefox.jco is saying. So he is not alone in his opinion. Attempts to shut down a dissenting opinion just makes the Blender community look worse to those sharing similar dissenting opinions. So it does not matter at that point who is right or who is wrong. I just means dissenters are pushed away and not brought closer. You know what they say for success, “Keep your friends close but keep your enemies closer.” I am not saying this to add fuel to this part of the conversation. What I have heard is not open to discussion. It is just what I have heard many others say. I am saying it for the opposite, to put out the flame and for us to move forward.
There is always confusion and misunderstandings and dissenters in a big and complex organization. The problem is not that it happens, but it is how issues are dealt with that matters for us to move forward today and in the tomorrows ahead.
So to move forward and get this thread back on track, Blender was rejected from GSoC 2015 yesterdays ago. How can we today as a community support Blender in the tomorrows ahead of us to get accepted next year?
One thing that may help is maybe start the ideas page much earlier in the year so it is not a last minute afterthought? Work that is rushed and last minute usually is poor quality. This would address the clear issue that was mentioned as one reason Blender did not make it in.
Also maybe, what can be done to encourage better mentor participation? Maybe an early start on that would help also?
Proofread the gsoc ideas page 
?
Don’t look too much into it, it means they are making room for other projects to get into the program. The guys running the GSoC program don’t care about whether the code is eventually used by the mentoring organisation or not, they are more interested about other aspects of the final outcome, like mentor - student interaction. In my opinion, thought it has very nice advantages for mentoring orgs, students are the main beneficiaries of the GSoC program.
That’s not a joke, right? The main problem with lot of open source projects seems to be bad project management. It’s not a problem if developers simply refuse to listen to users, they can do that. It’s much worse if you don’t have a clear idea of what the project should be and this is what is missing in open source development. I think the reason is that project management can be anyone. Just some random guys who don’t even need to be good at what they do. The outcome is pretty random too, but in Blender’s case we have seen some good development. Some other OS programs haven’t been that lucky.