2021-09-06 - 2021-09-10 Geometry Nodes Sub-Module Meetings


Developers or artists interested in contributing are welcome to join at the links below.

Meeting Notes

  • T91216: Deprecated nodes in the UI
    • Remove the deprecated nodes from the add menu.
    • Show deprecation warning in node headers.
      • Integrate with node warning system.
      • No popups
      • Warnings should be visible in the modifier
    • Deprecated nodes in search?
      • No, there should be no reason to do that, since the functionality is still available. Best not to mix the two systems.
    • Show that a node group contains deprecated nodes
  • T91155: Update Point Distribute node for fields
    • Depending on how we do it, it depends on the next task.
    • Options:
      • Completely duplicate all nodes
      • Add “Get/Set” attribute nodes
    • Completely duplicating all nodes was chosen. They can be duplicated internally as well, or not. But that is a development decision, not a design one.
  • T90864: Persistent/named attribute nodes
    • Ongoing back and forth about these nodes. Hans will create a proposal on devtalk to try to explain a way to have them while still satisfying the share-ability design directive from the Foundation.
    • Description by Dalai
      We can have some “store attribute” nodes which effectively are output nodes defined in the middle of the tree (since they are specific to a geometry, not to the entire tree. Inside the nodetree you can edit the name of the attribute, which is just changing the "default’ value of this “[special] group output”. In the modifier/node groups users can see the default value and set different ones
      Bonus: Users can connect string sockets and have the default to be “dynamic”. It can still be overridable/mapped outside the modifier. And its last evaluated/calculated default value is still shown in the modifier/node groups UI.

  • Further discussion of versioning nodes
  • Rename “Curve to Mesh” to “Curve Sweep”? (Hans)
    • “Curve to Mesh” is way too general, there are many methods to do this, and it’s already confusing with “Fill Curve”
    • Response is that it’s fine to have one node named “Curve to Mesh” that does what most users think of for converting between the two, just like there are lots of other “Data Type to Other Data Type” nodes.
    • Using that name keeps it search-able and simple.
    • So no, this node shouldn’t be renamed.
  • Merge strategy
    • The current plan is sound. And instead of waiting for all the nodes to be ready, we stick to switching the flip after the UI/warnings are in place.
    • It would still be nice to have at least the Point Distribute and Point Instance working (or ready to be merged) when we do the flip. To have more things for people to test.
  • Attribute Store
    • Hans presented the Shareable Named Attributes proposal.
    • We need a way to name/label the attributes (as oppose to show their default values as the labels) - e.g., as an advanced property of the node.