[SOLVED] Armory upgrade to Blender 2.9.X

Armory Engine General
,
2

Thanks for adressing this!

Sounds good to me, we should also discuss how to manage the transition on Github. My proposal would be the following:

We should ask lubos to add a branch (and maybe also a label) for 2.9 for which we create pull requests (you can choose the target branch when opening PRs). Maybe we should open issues for some of the bigger tasks as well, I don’t know. Then, somebody of us can create a “main PR” in draft mode which merges the new branch into master when ready.

I made a small (likely incomplete) to-do list for 2.9 a while ago for the above points:

1. Exporter changes:

  • Rigid bodies: steps_per_second was renamed, leading to an error on export
  • The principled BSDF node has a new emission strength input, node indices might be wrong now
  • Also, 2.91 introduced a lot of other changes to the Python API that might be breaking stuff: https://wiki.blender.org/wiki/Reference/Release_Notes/2.91/Python_API
  • The attribute node got an alpha output socket in 2.92, also it can now access custom properties of the material’s user

2. New features

  • Support for Nishita Sky model: there is a very nice implementation here that is licensed with the Unlicense (so we could just port it over): https://github.com/wwwtyro/glsl-atmosphere. However there is still the open issue of (ir)radiance discussed here. Maybe there even is a preetham implementation somewhere around to have support for all Blender sky models?
  • Check if the new asset browser can be utilized for better multi-file projects (proxies, maybe even node setup/traits). Also, is there anything we can do with library overrides?
  • The new search menu might require some operators to be updated, only those who are exposed in the UI will be found unless explicitely stated: https://wiki.blender.org/wiki/Reference/Release_Notes/2.90/Python_API
  • (Limited) support for geometry nodes (advanced topic)

3. UI changes

I’m not aware of any deprecations so far. Also we should go through a few of the forum posts/issues in the last month to see which are related to 2.9 to identify more issues.

Should we add some checklist somewhere to keep progress of everything? Opening issues for each item would probably be a bit of an overkill. On the other hand, that’s what issues are for. I don’t know, if we do it we should of course combine many small changes into bigger issues (like UI changes, general API changes).

What do you think?

Edit: We should also go through the change logs here: https://docs.blender.org/api/2.90/change_log.html

5 Likes