Nodes: Panel declarations for grouping sockets #108649

Merged
Lukas Tönne merged 27 commits from LukasTonne/blender:node-socket-categories into main 2023-06-14 18:02:46 +02:00
Member

Adds an optional list of "categories" to node trees. Each socket can be
assigned a category. Sub-panels will be created in the future for these
categories.

Categories are stored in a list in node trees, next to socket declarations.
Each category has a name, but it does not have to be unique. In future
a category might also store whether it is visible by default and similar
information.

C API and RNA API are both added. Categories and their socket
assignments are accessible to users through another list in the "Group"
tab of the node editor sidebar.

Sockets are assigned a category by an index into the category list.
These indices are updated when categories are added, removed,
or moved in the list.
Sockets of the same category will remain together even when adding,
removing, or moving sockets or categories, renaming, etc.
A socket can be moved up or down within a category but each category
remains a contiguous block. Actual tree views may be created later.

  • Rename "category" to "panel
  • Use array of pointers instead of plain array so that category pointers remain valid after changes (adding or moving categories)
  • Use BLI_listbase_sort_r instead of BLI_listbase_sort to store userdata and avoid temporary category index storage for sorting (if still needed after switching to ListBase?)
  • Consider: store category pointer instead of identifier per socket, might be easier with ListBase
  • Fix memleaks from allocated name strings
  • Rename bNodeSocketPanel to bNodePanel
  • Separate task(s): Replace use of bNodeSocket for node tree interfaces, make serializable socket declarations, construct a tree structure reflecting "ownership" of sockets by panels
Adds an optional list of "categories" to node trees. Each socket can be assigned a category. Sub-panels will be created in the future for these categories. Categories are stored in a list in node trees, next to socket declarations. Each category has a name, but it does not have to be unique. In future a category might also store whether it is visible by default and similar information. C API and RNA API are both added. Categories and their socket assignments are accessible to users through another list in the "Group" tab of the node editor sidebar. Sockets are assigned a category by an index into the category list. These indices are updated when categories are added, removed, or moved in the list. Sockets of the same category will remain together even when adding, removing, or moving sockets or categories, renaming, etc. A socket can be moved up or down within a category but each category remains a contiguous block. Actual tree views may be created later. - [x] Rename "category" to "panel - [x] Use array of pointers instead of plain array so that category pointers remain valid after changes (adding or moving categories) - [x] Use `BLI_listbase_sort_r` instead of `BLI_listbase_sort` to store userdata and avoid temporary category index storage for sorting (if still needed after switching to ListBase?) - [x] Consider: store category pointer instead of identifier per socket, might be easier with ListBase - [x] Fix memleaks from allocated name strings - [x] Rename `bNodeSocketPanel` to `bNodePanel` - [ ] Separate task(s): Replace use of `bNodeSocket` for node tree interfaces, make serializable socket declarations, construct a tree structure reflecting "ownership" of sockets by panels
Lukas Tönne added 2 commits 2023-06-06 11:48:00 +02:00
909430f5dc Category declarations in node trees for organizing modifier UI.
Adds an optional list of "categories" to node trees. Each socket can be
assigned a category. Sub-panels will be created in the future for these
categories (TODO).

Sockets of the same category will remain together even when adding,
removing, or moving sockets or categories, renaming, etc.
A socket can be moved up or down within a category but each category
remains a contiguous block. Actual tree views may be created later.
Lukas Tönne requested review from Hans Goudey 2023-06-06 11:48:08 +02:00
Lukas Tönne added this to the Nodes & Physics project 2023-06-06 11:48:13 +02:00
Lukas Tönne added 1 commit 2023-06-06 12:19:11 +02:00
Hans Goudey requested changes 2023-06-06 14:26:27 +02:00
Hans Goudey left a comment
Member

Looks good! Mostly just small style things inline. Thanks for using an array instead of a linked list.

Looks good! Mostly just small style things inline. Thanks for using an array instead of a linked list.
@ -543,2 +543,4 @@
* \{ */
/**
* Run this after relevant changes to categories
Member

This comment fits on one line

This comment fits on one line
LukasTonne marked this conversation as resolved
@ -552,0 +568,4 @@
/**
* Add a new socket category to the node tree.
* \param name Name of the new category.
Member

There's meant to be a colon after the name here: \param name:

There's meant to be a colon after the name here: `\param name:`
LukasTonne marked this conversation as resolved
@ -3758,2 +3808,4 @@
namespace blender::bke {
/* Fix socket category indices after changes. */
static void remap_socket_categories(bNodeTree &ntree, std::function<int(int)> index_fn)
Member

Better to use FunctionRef than std::function here I think, for the reasons mentioned in the header.

Better to use `FunctionRef` than `std::function` here I think, for the reasons mentioned in the header.
Author
Member

Not needed any more, sockets now store category UID instead of simple index, so category changes don't require remapping.

Not needed any more, sockets now store category UID instead of simple index, so category changes don't require remapping.
LukasTonne marked this conversation as resolved
@ -3760,0 +3829,4 @@
bNodeSocketCategory *old_categories_array = ntree->socket_categories_array;
const Span<bNodeSocketCategory> old_categories = ntree->socket_categories();
ntree->socket_categories_array = MEM_cnew_array<bNodeSocketCategory>(
ntree->socket_categories_num + 1, "socket categories");
Member

IMO __func__ for the allocation string is nicer than specifying one manually. It just takes up less visual space. I've also seen other developers preferring that too.

IMO `__func__` for the allocation string is nicer than specifying one manually. It just takes up less visual space. I've also seen other developers preferring that too.
LukasTonne marked this conversation as resolved
@ -3760,0 +3833,4 @@
++ntree->socket_categories_num;
const MutableSpan<bNodeSocketCategory> new_categories = ntree->socket_categories_for_write();
for (const int i : new_categories.index_range().drop_back(1)) {
Member

Don't have a strong preference, but this seems a bit more idiomatic and clear to me:
std::copy(old_categories.begin(), old_categories.end(), new_categories.data());

Don't have a strong preference, but this seems a bit more idiomatic and clear to me: ` std::copy(old_categories.begin(), old_categories.end(), new_categories.data());`
LukasTonne marked this conversation as resolved
@ -3167,0 +3201,4 @@
{
bNodeTree *ntree = (bNodeTree *)ptr->owner_id;
bNodeSocketCategory *category = (bNodeSocketCategory *)value.data;
Member

Super picky but this newline isn't helpful IMO, better to more closely connect the variable declaration and the null check.

Super picky but this newline isn't helpful IMO, better to more closely connect the variable declaration and the null check.
LukasTonne marked this conversation as resolved
Hans Goudey changed title from Category declaration in node trees and sockets for grouping sockets to Nodes: Category declarations for grouping sockets 2023-06-06 14:32:54 +02:00
Hans Goudey reviewed 2023-06-06 14:34:20 +02:00
@ -246,0 +269,4 @@
tree = snode.edit_tree
categories = tree.socket_categories
# Remember index to move the item
Member

Period at the end of the comment.

Period at the end of the comment.
LukasTonne marked this conversation as resolved
@ -957,0 +1009,4 @@
active_category = tree.socket_categories.active
if active_category is not None:
layout.prop(active_category, "name")
Member

I know I started this with the socket list, but I'm regretting it now. Maybe we can skip exposing the name property separate from the list. It should be clear that you can rename in the list.

I know I started this with the socket list, but I'm regretting it now. Maybe we can skip exposing the name property separate from the list. It should be clear that you can rename in the list.
Author
Member

Not sure, we may want to add more settings to categories, such as options to close categories by default, doc strings, etc.

Not sure, we may want to add more settings to categories, such as options to close categories by default, doc strings, etc.
Author
Member

Ideally i'd like to display the node tree declarations in a way that resembles the final node output, to make it more intuitive. The vertical UI layout of the node editor sidebar makes that a bit challenging. But lets say we could arrange it any way we like, then you'd have inputs on the left and outputs on the right. Categories would show in a kind of tree view matching the panels in modifiers. Socket details and category details would be displayed close to active element.

Ideally i'd like to display the node tree declarations in a way that resembles the final node output, to make it more intuitive. The vertical UI layout of the node editor sidebar makes that a bit challenging. But lets say we could arrange it any way we like, then you'd have inputs on the left and outputs on the right. Categories would show in a kind of tree view matching the panels in modifiers. Socket details and category details would be displayed close to active element. ![](/attachments/b3fb4846-83b0-4d4b-b172-097ff3be0091)
Member

Hmm, all I mean is that there's no need to have the separate name property outside of the list. Not that displaying more options doesn't make sense.

For he other stuff, the inputs and outputs used to be side-by-side, but it doesn't work well with Blender's single-column UI layout paradigm. But that can be discussed more later.

Hmm, all I mean is that there's no need to have the separate name property outside of the list. Not that displaying more options doesn't make sense. For he other stuff, the inputs and outputs used to be side-by-side, but it doesn't work well with Blender's single-column UI layout paradigm. But that can be discussed more later.
Author
Member

I want to add a simple int identifier to categories, so that after adding/removing/moving categories i can remap the expand flag bits. Otherwise these category actions will mess up the open/closed state of panels, because the same flag index refers to a different panel.

EDIT: The IDs have been added, but updating the ui_expand_flag after category changes is proving ugly: It requires a list of category ids along with the open/closed state flags, so that old flags can be mapped to categories and find their new indices. Decided to do this in a later PR, possibly after further improvements to the panel system. In the meantime panels might open or close unintentionally when changing categories, which seems acceptable.

I want to add a simple `int identifier` to categories, so that after adding/removing/moving categories i can remap the expand flag bits. Otherwise these category actions will mess up the open/closed state of panels, because the same flag index refers to a different panel. **EDIT**: The IDs have been added, but updating the `ui_expand_flag` after category changes is proving ugly: It requires a list of category ids along with the open/closed state flags, so that old flags can be mapped to categories and find their new indices. Decided to do this in a later PR, possibly after further improvements to the panel system. In the meantime panels might open or close unintentionally when changing categories, which seems acceptable. <video src="/attachments/735f2a89-77ab-4733-8c03-5bddd518d8dc" title="2023-06-06 13-02-36.mp4" controls></video>
Lukas Tönne added 1 commit 2023-06-06 17:14:22 +02:00
c7ab5dc068 Added a `category_id` identifier for stable Panel<->category relations.
Instead of just an index, we now use the category_id to specify the
category of a socket as well as associating a panel with a category.
This has two consequences:
1. No need to remap indices after adding/removing/moving a category.
    Flip side is that finding the category of a socket now requires a
    linear search. In future this could be more efficient using a map,
    but that is a separate task.
2. Now the panel open/closed state bits are associated with a stable
    identifier, so panels will retain their state when moving.
Lukas Tönne added 3 commits 2023-06-07 11:08:25 +02:00
Lukas Tönne added 1 commit 2023-06-07 11:13:11 +02:00
Lukas Tönne requested review from Hans Goudey 2023-06-07 11:55:59 +02:00

I think these should be called "panels" rather than "socket categories"? Not sure why we need another name for this.

And I would also call them just "panels" or "node panels" rather than "socket panels", to leave open the option of putting other things in there in the future.

I think these should be called "panels" rather than "socket categories"? Not sure why we need another name for this. And I would also call them just "panels" or "node panels" rather than "socket panels", to leave open the option of putting other things in there in the future.

Thanks for using an array instead of a linked list.

I don't think we should be moving in this direction for DNA. With custom data layers we are running into the problem that Python API pointers are becoming invalid when they are deleted. This will have a similar problem.

> Thanks for using an array instead of a linked list. I don't think we should be moving in this direction for DNA. With custom data layers we are running into the problem that Python API pointers are becoming invalid when they are deleted. This will have a similar problem.
Member

I think these should be called panels rather than categories? Not sure why we need another name for this.

Using "Panel" seems fine to me too. Another option is "Group", which at least assumes a bit less about how they'll be used in the future.

Thanks for using an array instead of a linked list.

I don't think we should be moving in this direction for DNA. With custom data layers we are running into the problem that Python API pointers are becoming invalid when they are deleted. This will have a similar problem.

Not sure, like was discussed in #107500, I think the proper solution for that is to use some other identifier for RNA. Using an array simplifies any code that deals with this data, it's too bad if we can't do that anywhere. And we'll never remove that problem this way anyway, since we'll always have some arrays in DNA like attribute elements, etc.

> I think these should be called panels rather than categories? Not sure why we need another name for this. Using "Panel" seems fine to me too. Another option is "Group", which at least assumes a bit less about how they'll be used in the future. > > Thanks for using an array instead of a linked list. > > I don't think we should be moving in this direction for DNA. With custom data layers we are running into the problem that Python API pointers are becoming invalid when they are deleted. This will have a similar problem. Not sure, like was discussed in #107500, I think the proper solution for that is to use some other identifier for RNA. Using an array simplifies any code that deals with this data, it's too bad if we can't do that anywhere. And we'll never remove that problem this way anyway, since we'll always have some arrays in DNA like attribute elements, etc.

Using "Panel" seems fine to me too. Another option is "Group", which at least assumes a bit less about how they'll be used in the future.

Group is too confusing with node groups I think.

I didn't expect these to be used for anything except panels, do you have anything in mind?

Not sure, like was discussed in #107500, I think the proper solution for that is to use some other identifier for RNA. Using an array simplifies any code that deals with this data, it's too bad if we can't do that anywhere. And we'll never remove that problem this way anyway, since we'll always have some arrays in DNA like attribute elements, etc.

I'm not sure identifiers are practical as a general solution to this. Every struct then would need to contain an identifier, lookup would be slow or you'd need to additionally maintain a hash map. And the RNA pointer to a node panel would potentially need to be a node node tree pointer + node identifier + panel identifier?

I'd rather not change the convention until we have a well defined alternative.

> Using "Panel" seems fine to me too. Another option is "Group", which at least assumes a bit less about how they'll be used in the future. Group is too confusing with node groups I think. I didn't expect these to be used for anything except panels, do you have anything in mind? > Not sure, like was discussed in #107500, I think the proper solution for that is to use some other identifier for RNA. Using an array simplifies any code that deals with this data, it's too bad if we can't do that anywhere. And we'll never remove that problem this way anyway, since we'll always have some arrays in DNA like attribute elements, etc. I'm not sure identifiers are practical as a general solution to this. Every struct then would need to contain an identifier, lookup would be slow or you'd need to additionally maintain a hash map. And the RNA pointer to a node panel would potentially need to be a node node tree pointer + node identifier + panel identifier? I'd rather not change the convention until we have a well defined alternative.
Member

I didn't expect these to be used for anything except panels, do you have anything in mind?

Hmm, I guess not, but I was thinking that it's a bit weird to drag "Panels" around if we present them in a tree layout like this:
image

And the RNA pointer to a node panel would potentially need to be a node node tree pointer + node identifier + panel identifier?

I think the existing struct would work fine (though fair point that the alternative isn't defined very well at this point). PointerRNA.data could be the panel/category identifier, the rest of the struct would be the same. I don't think a bNode would be necessary there-- the panels are properties of the node tree.

>I didn't expect these to be used for anything except panels, do you have anything in mind? Hmm, I guess not, but I was thinking that it's a bit weird to drag "Panels" around if we present them in a tree layout like this: ![image](/attachments/a292dcf3-776d-4d99-9c20-ad92d2d7dcde) >And the RNA pointer to a node panel would potentially need to be a node node tree pointer + node identifier + panel identifier? I think the existing struct would work fine (though fair point that the alternative isn't defined very well at this point). `PointerRNA.data` could be the panel/category identifier, the rest of the struct would be the same. I don't think a `bNode` would be necessary there-- the panels are properties of the node tree.
Member

Using an array of pointers (CategoryPanel **) in DNA is probably a fine compromise too, gives us pointer stability but also type safety (Span<CategoryPanel *> and Span<const CategoryPanel *>). It would just makes ownership unclear but can we really ask for that when we're using DNA? :P

Using an array of pointers (`CategoryPanel **`) in DNA is probably a fine compromise too, gives us pointer stability but also type safety (`Span<CategoryPanel *>` and `Span<const CategoryPanel *>`). It would just makes ownership unclear but can we really ask for that when we're using DNA? :P

An array of pointers if fine with me.

An array of pointers if fine with me.
Author
Member

I think these should be called "panels" rather than "socket categories"

I'm ok with "panel" too. It's a UI term, but since UI layout is the only thing we're going to use it for i think that's justified. "Category" was just the first thing i could think of. "Group" is overused and confusing.

I don't think we should be moving in this direction for DNA

I can change this to linked lists, but this seems to be an unsettled argument? I like the simplicity of arrays, but can see how our python implementation struggles with them.

Do we actually have any guarantees regarding validity of objects in RNA? It seems kind of implicit right now that most objects remain valid until their ID block is freed (zero users, reload, undo).

> I think these should be called "panels" rather than "socket categories" I'm ok with "panel" too. It's a UI term, but since UI layout is the only thing we're going to use it for i think that's justified. "Category" was just the first thing i could think of. "Group" is overused and confusing. > I don't think we should be moving in this direction for DNA I can change this to linked lists, but this seems to be an unsettled argument? I like the simplicity of arrays, but can see how our python implementation struggles with them. Do we actually have any guarantees regarding validity of objects in RNA? It seems kind of implicit right now that _most_ objects remain valid until their ID block is freed (zero users, reload, undo).

Do we actually have any guarantees regarding validity of objects in RNA? It seems kind of implicit right now that most objects remain valid until their ID block is freed (zero users, reload, undo).

There's no explicit rule, but it's certainly something that many scripts do and should be able to rely on.

> Do we actually have any guarantees regarding validity of objects in RNA? It seems kind of implicit right now that _most_ objects remain valid until their ID block is freed (zero users, reload, undo). There's no explicit rule, but it's certainly something that many scripts do and should be able to rely on.
Lukas Tönne added 1 commit 2023-06-08 11:18:36 +02:00
Lukas Tönne force-pushed node-socket-categories from abae706c9b to f172423441 2023-06-08 11:34:01 +02:00 Compare
Lukas Tönne force-pushed node-socket-categories from ebbd9629ac to 3d1aae86c5 2023-06-08 11:53:22 +02:00 Compare
Lukas Tönne added 1 commit 2023-06-08 13:04:17 +02:00

@LukasTonne any reason they are called "node socket panells" rather than "node panels"?

@LukasTonne any reason they are called "node socket panells" rather than "node panels"?
Author
Member

@LukasTonne any reason they are called "node socket panells" rather than "node panels"?

The scope of this is a bit unclear. It started out as panels to organize sockets, if it's supposed to be a more general thing i can change that.

> @LukasTonne any reason they are called "node socket panells" rather than "node panels"? The scope of this is a bit unclear. It started out as panels to organize sockets, if it's supposed to be a more general thing i can change that.

I can imagine in the future add-ons or native Blender nodes could add text or buttons in these panels. Some cases will be covered by making more things available as sockets like enums and color ramps, but that won't cover everything.

I can imagine in the future add-ons or native Blender nodes could add text or buttons in these panels. Some cases will be covered by making more things available as sockets like enums and color ramps, but that won't cover everything.
Member

@LukasTonne Could you use an array of pointers in DNA rather than ListBase? That gives much better type safety without losing the pointer stability.

@LukasTonne Could you use an array of pointers in DNA rather than `ListBase`? That gives much better type safety without losing the pointer stability.
Lukas Tönne added 2 commits 2023-06-08 16:56:56 +02:00
ab0d8761d2 Use array of pointers for node panels instead plain array.
This has the advantage that pointers to panel declarations remain valid
after most panel API functions. This is important for python scripting
where a panel is referenced by pointer internally.
Lukas Tönne reviewed 2023-06-08 17:51:53 +02:00
@ -543,2 +543,4 @@
* \{ */
/** Run this after relevant changes to panels to ensure sockets remain sorted by panel. */
void ntreeEnsureSocketInterfacePanelOrder(bNodeTree *ntree);
Author
Member

This is currently in the public API because the NODE_OT_tree_socket_move operator works directly on DNA and needs to call this after it moves sockets. That operator should also use an API method so the update function does not need to be exposed. I suggest a separate fix.

This is currently in the public API because the `NODE_OT_tree_socket_move` operator works directly on DNA and needs to call this after it moves sockets. That operator should also use an API method so the update function does not need to be exposed. I suggest a separate fix.
Lukas Tönne added 2 commits 2023-06-08 18:18:13 +02:00
Lukas Tönne added 1 commit 2023-06-09 10:58:13 +02:00
Lukas Tönne added 2 commits 2023-06-09 16:34:20 +02:00
f9003d386b Renamed bNodeSocketPanel to just bNodePanel.
While sockets will be the first thing to populate such panels there can
be other things in future that go into them.
Author
Member

I've addressed the issues mentioned here:

  • array-of-pointers instead of plain array or ListBase, for stable pointers
  • direct pointers to panels in the socket declarations, no identifier needed
  • renamed "panel" to "category"
  • renamed bNodeSocketPanel to bNodePanel

Do we want to hide this as "experimental" until we add actual panels and/or tree views?

I've addressed the issues mentioned here: - array-of-pointers instead of plain array or ListBase, for stable pointers - direct pointers to panels in the socket declarations, no identifier needed - renamed "panel" to "category" - renamed `bNodeSocketPanel` to `bNodePanel` Do we want to hide this as "experimental" until we add actual panels and/or tree views?
Lukas Tönne added 1 commit 2023-06-09 16:54:52 +02:00
Member

Do we want to hide this as "experimental" until we add actual panels and/or tree views?

I think that makes sense. Adding a poll for the new panel and an experimental option seems good enough for now.

>Do we want to hide this as "experimental" until we add actual panels and/or tree views? I think that makes sense. Adding a poll for the new panel and an experimental option seems good enough for now.
Lukas Tönne added 3 commits 2023-06-12 10:52:45 +02:00
Lukas Tönne added 1 commit 2023-06-12 11:54:19 +02:00
Hans Goudey changed title from Nodes: Category declarations for grouping sockets to Nodes: Panel declarations for grouping sockets 2023-06-12 15:30:26 +02:00
Hans Goudey added this to the 4.0 milestone 2023-06-12 15:30:36 +02:00
Hans Goudey requested changes 2023-06-12 18:25:21 +02:00
Hans Goudey left a comment
Member

Just two small comments, otherwise this looks good.

Just two small comments, otherwise this looks good.
@ -3661,0 +3706,4 @@
}
/* Store panel index for sorting. */
blender::Map<const bNodePanel *, int> panel_index_map;
Member

VectorSet and VectorSet::index_of` are probably a more natural choice here, with a bit less boilerplate.

`VectorSet` and VectorSet::index_of` are probably a more natural choice here, with a bit less boilerplate.
LukasTonne marked this conversation as resolved
@ -657,2 +674,4 @@
blender::Span<const bNodeSocket *> interface_inputs() const;
blender::Span<const bNodeSocket *> interface_outputs() const;
blender::Span<bNodePanel *> panels() const;
Member

panels() should return Span<const bNodePanel *>, so a const bNodeSocket * doesn't give you a mutable bNodePanel

`panels()` should return `Span<const bNodePanel *>`, so a `const bNodeSocket *` doesn't give you a mutable `bNodePanel`
LukasTonne marked this conversation as resolved
Lukas Tönne added 2 commits 2023-06-13 12:42:10 +02:00
Lukas Tönne requested review from Hans Goudey 2023-06-13 12:42:42 +02:00
Hans Goudey approved these changes 2023-06-13 14:31:44 +02:00
Author
Member

@blender-bot build

@blender-bot build
Lukas Tönne added 1 commit 2023-06-14 17:22:36 +02:00
buildbot/vexp-code-patch-coordinator Build done. Details
581b462642
Merge branch 'main' into node-socket-categories
Author
Member

@blender-bot build

@blender-bot build
Lukas Tönne merged commit 8c2ad8bbd3 into main 2023-06-14 18:02:46 +02:00
Lukas Tönne deleted branch node-socket-categories 2023-06-14 18:02:47 +02:00
Sign in to join this conversation.
No reviewers
No Label
Interest
Alembic
Interest
Animation & Rigging
Interest
Asset Browser
Interest
Asset Browser Project Overview
Interest
Audio
Interest
Automated Testing
Interest
Blender Asset Bundle
Interest
BlendFile
Interest
Collada
Interest
Compatibility
Interest
Compositing
Interest
Core
Interest
Cycles
Interest
Dependency Graph
Interest
Development Management
Interest
EEVEE
Interest
EEVEE & Viewport
Interest
Freestyle
Interest
Geometry Nodes
Interest
Grease Pencil
Interest
ID Management
Interest
Images & Movies
Interest
Import Export
Interest
Line Art
Interest
Masking
Interest
Metal
Interest
Modeling
Interest
Modifiers
Interest
Motion Tracking
Interest
Nodes & Physics
Interest
OpenGL
Interest
Overlay
Interest
Overrides
Interest
Performance
Interest
Physics
Interest
Pipeline, Assets & IO
Interest
Platforms, Builds & Tests
Interest
Python API
Interest
Render & Cycles
Interest
Render Pipeline
Interest
Sculpt, Paint & Texture
Interest
Text Editor
Interest
Translations
Interest
Triaging
Interest
Undo
Interest
USD
Interest
User Interface
Interest
UV Editing
Interest
VFX & Video
Interest
Video Sequencer
Interest
Virtual Reality
Interest
Vulkan
Interest
Wayland
Interest
Workbench
Legacy
Blender 2.8 Project
Legacy
Milestone 1: Basic, Local Asset Browser
Legacy
OpenGL Error
Meta
Good First Issue
Meta
Papercut
Meta
Retrospective
Meta
Security
Module
Animation & Rigging
Module
Core
Module
Development Management
Module
EEVEE & Viewport
Module
Grease Pencil
Module
Modeling
Module
Nodes & Physics
Module
Pipeline, Assets & IO
Module
Platforms, Builds & Tests
Module
Python API
Module
Render & Cycles
Module
Sculpt, Paint & Texture
Module
Triaging
Module
User Interface
Module
VFX & Video
Platform
FreeBSD
Platform
Linux
Platform
macOS
Platform
Windows
Priority
High
Priority
Low
Priority
Normal
Priority
Unbreak Now!
Status
Archived
Status
Confirmed
Status
Duplicate
Status
Needs Info from Developers
Status
Needs Information from User
Status
Needs Triage
Status
Resolved
Type
Bug
Type
Design
Type
Known Issue
Type
Patch
Type
Report
Type
To Do
No Milestone
No Assignees
3 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format 'yyyy-mm-dd'.

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: blender/blender#108649
No description provided.