@PLyczkowski, good to know, if someone wants to try this out they can…
Am still personally not so motivated about this - unless others are able to run the site.
Aligorith, I would like to second Campbell’s response that it would be indeed useful to have these and would be great if you could add some, somewhere.
Razorblade, I know your question is more general than this, but it touches on another FAQ which is something like “how do I begin to understand the monster that is Blender’s codebase”, which is something that even very experienced programmers ask themselves when they first come to the project. The FAQ of this thread’s topic addresses this broadly, and points to another FAQ, http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Dev:Doc/FAQ, which I’d like to see greatly expanded on. I wrote most of the words on that page after the heading “Source Code FAQ”, but was clearly just scratching a couple itches that I myself had. It would be great to get more questions and answers on that page.
There is a custom blender version that does do an amazing job on object collisions, breaking glass etc.
I was wondering will such versions (which that developer, is keeping up with recent blender releases) someday be merged into main ?.
I’m not sure if there are more custom blender versions, but i would think if its in main branch such developer would have to spend less time on building blender. It can be experimental (use add your own risk), or so… just thinking that freeing up developers time, would benefit other areas of development.
Or Maybe an installer that would allow selection of custom blender parts and which would compile locally.
In that situation, people could choose for basic install, or include experimental updates (maybe with some update checker as well).
Some update checker could just download the differences, and then it would lower the strain of web download data.
@PGTART #65, all of this is possible, its just a lot of work to do this well (setup, maintain build servers on different platforms… make sure patches apply… )…
And on the user side, communicate when feature-builds are added or no longer included.
And all this to provide unsupported features that will likely not be included in a release… at that point it may be less hassle just to make a branch of Blender with additional features. Which seems more realistic… its quite easy to test this using free git hosting, so theres very low barrier of entry on starting a project like that.
I don’t know what to make of this. You just confirmed usability issues are always in the back burner. You’re not even aware they’re 2.75 targets, which were previously 2.74… They kept being pushed back.
@blendDoodler. I see now, the page was linked to from: http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Dev:Doc/Projects
Talking with other devs on IRC now and in fact none of us knew about this.
Someones been a bit sneaky and added the link in… thinking if they add items to our TODO list - it gets magically finished
(with good intentions - but this is not how to help us).
However to say that usability is ignored just because this list didn’t get attention… isn’t really accurate.
Edit, page has been deleted.
It was written without talking to developers and was basically a wish-list.
The author meant well, but plans should be in touch with reality, communicated and assigned to developers too.
I’ve set this page to Watch, so any edits don’t go by un-noticed.
Hi,
is there a chance to have fire/smoke support on the GPU in near future ? How about OpenVDB and implicit skinning ??
Cheers.
@ideasman42, think you’re mixing up two pages here. The one you deleted (http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Dev:Doc/Projects/UI/2.70-targets) was set up by Jonathan quite some time ago and was a first roadmap for the UI-team IIRC. It wasn’t updated since then (although I wrote an update but never updated the page).
The other one is the official UI-projects page set up by the UI-team. It is also the one that was linked to from the main projects page (checked with Ton before adding the link). I’d personally like to keep the link there since it is “official” and more or less up-to-date. It still needs to be updated for 2.75 though 
Edit: See http://lists.blender.org/pipermail/bf-interface/2014-August/000013.html & http://lists.blender.org/pipermail/bf-interface/2014-August/000018.html
@JulianSeverin - I saw both pages.
Links in http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Dev:Doc/Projects should only ever be added under the up-coming release section, if we actually plan to do them before the release.
Else this page doesn’t serve its primary purpose (and we look like we fail every release).
(note… this is getting off topic, would rather keep Q&A focus, only replying here because of @blendDoodler raising the topic).
A question I see asked a lot is “should I get the best CPU or GPU I can afford?”, and besides the usual discussions about what each users preferences and recommendations are, some are suggesting using Octane instead of Cycles because it utilizes ‘out-of-core’ GPU rendering so the limited memory is not an issue. Usually what is most recommended is to invest in the best GPU possible for the rendering speed, and just ‘make-do’ with the memory and feature limitations. While advanced-level users may have little or no trouble with the limited memory, most amateurs and beginners have no idea how to manage with only 2-4 GB, or even 6 if they can afford it. This results in many frustrated users and vague questions seeking help without much clue what they are looking for.
Considering how many comments can be found regarding users running into out-of-memory errors with GPU’s, and users preferring not to render with CPU because of how slow even a high-end CPU is compared to a far less expensive mid-range GPU, I am surprised there are not more discussions about when/if Blender will have some kind of counter/workaround.
So, if this question is relevant here, is there any consideration for, or possibly plans for, something like this for Blender anytime in the near future?
What kind of modeling tools are prepared for near future (or maybe some big improvements of existing ones)?
So wanting to know when the GSL upgrade will occur is too specific?
it’s kinda a big deal to sculpters and the game engine folks.
how about this, is anyone working on it currently?
Thanks again.
I would love to know if the developers think that having a y-up option in Blender will ever be possible or is z-up too entrenched in the core application to ever make it feasible? I jump between many 3d applications and game engines that all use y-up as default and as much as I love Blender it is always a pain to have to re-orient myself and it never feels natural to me.
For model creation it is no big deal, but when animating it can be frustrating! Would love to see it as an option in the future as I am sure many others would 
Yes GPU rendering should receive more love. Actually anything that has to do with GPU should receive more love.
I was wondering since Mantaflow does have basic CUDA support why not support it properly instead of just a GSOC project that might never see the light of the day.
@ideasman42, there are questions in #39 and #40. As you answered all questions so far or gave a quick explanation, I guess they just slipped through.
Edit: As far as I understand it, this thread is about asking questions and not about feature requests. Pretty noisy once more.
Regarding questions about features planned, our planning is on-line. If the feature is absent its probably not planned (near term at least).
Devs have their own personal TODO lists too. but in that case you really need to ask each developer what they plan… some developers prefer to keep this to themselves to avoid over promising when they aren’t sure if its going to work out.
#41
1 & 2) not near term.
3) Cycles dev need to answer.
@Dantus, #41
While I’d like to see this work, it hasn’t really taken off so well. Not to say its failed either - we had users working with devs before this too.
But many modules still don’t have user members. Really good artists are busy with their own projects I expect.
Beside c/c++ docs, are there any plans to extend the python api? Listening to events would be nice.
Checking manually wether something has changed in the update handler is not very efficient.
I am also interested in this. As I try and change Blender Source code having created custom modfier (+ extended/changed 2 others), i revert to Python and try to achieve somewhat similar functionality(obviously not dynamic) with modular operators. Why? Because what use is a custom modifier if it i will have to recompile in a month or two? What good is it if I cannot share it or open in fresh Blender install? It’s almost like Plugin API/extending is non existent. It’s not just copy/pasting a .dll in a folder like with other 3d apps. As such PYTHON has very important role in defining custom functionality that survives from 1 release to another.
In other words I am also interested to know if any changes/advances to Python are planned
Thank you
“Regarding questions about features planned, our planning is on-line. If the feature is absent its probably not planned (near term at least).”
where? I would like to read it 
I found this -
"For 2.7x projects we will allow forward and (minor) backward compatibility breakage. That means that by default, the 2.7x .blend files don”t have to read reliably in 2.6x or older. Backward compatibility stays crucial though, and should only be acceptable for big and important improvements. Changes can also be including a revision of UI layouts, naming of options, themes, and shortcut defaults.However, for as long as we add breakage in Blender 2.7x versions, we could also try to keep the last 2.69 release updated with essential fixes.
This is also the perfect period to move to git for Blender coding.
A summary of projects or targets that fit this period:
- Move to OpenGL 2.1 minimal (means: UI/tools can be designed needing it, like offscreen drawing)
- Depsgraph refactor, including threaded updates
- Fix our duplicator system, animation proxy (for local parts of linked/referenced data)
- Redesign 3D viewport drawing (full cleanup of space_view3d module)
- Work on cpu-based selection code for viewport
- Sequencer rewrite
- Asset manager, better UI and tools for handling linkage
- Python “Custom Editor” api (including better Python support for event handlers, notifiers).
- UI: refresh our default"
however it says 2.7x -> GSL upgrade to 2.1 min
When is dis?
@pink vertex, #79. no, am wary of hooking Python into Blender in this particular low level. We had it for 2.4x (Crystal-space used to sync data) - we could investigate having this I suppose (once new depsgraph branch is in and stabalized). In general being able to sync Blender’s data with external representation is useful of course.
@BluePrintRandom,
See: http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Dev:Doc/Projects (2.75 targets)
These are near term goals, everything else is a bit up in the air, though OpenGL viewport work is going to get priority, not sure we have specifics planned out in the detail being asked here (prefer this for monthly blog update).
Note that we get a reasonable number of unplanned improvements each release too, eg:
http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Brita/Proposals/UIPreviews
… though they’re typically smaller-mid sized projects.