That’s an addon, before we had this as a tool there was already an addon.
The thing is that an addon will be slow with hi poly count meshes, what we are talking about here is the patch in C++, if the author of that can convert his technique to a patch and share it in developers.blender.org could be great because the current status of the tool is useless I’m afraid 
@dfelinto is there some place to track if there is some evolution of this tool?
…When, even without the mega grand on 1 million $ and years expectations users can get really necessary things… could in 2016 … but someone cut Boolean carve, leaving users without choice for years, and then got trash in the form of an Extrude Manifold.
Now… Even after 1 year 
Depending on the module, it can sometimes feel like everything just falls on deaf ears if one was to log them in the tracker. It is almost to the point where I think I should just take a couple of issues I reported a long time ago and post them on devtalk, because the way the devs. want us to go is not working in that case.
Now for the remaining issues in terms of ensuring Blender is rock solid, say the report is heard, and an effort is made to fix a buggy tool, but then the patch is shelved indefinitely. In other cases, a report is heard, and it is slated to be fixed by some refactor which will take place in the future, but there is no date and no timeline.
Blender has come a long way, but the way some of these issues are handled give a reminder that Blender is still very much FOSS (as opposed to what I would call PGOS, professional-grade open software). Now I am aware of the new policy that calls on devs. to fix high priority bugs, but I am not sure how much is covered other than crashes and regressions. Now of course there is the chance a new dev. is hired, and a lot of outstanding bugs are suddenly fixed (see the UV work), but you can’t count on that unless you have a lot of patience or unless you are feeling really lucky.
@ThomasDinges I think this is interesting feedback, maybe something can be improved in this area, even when the main focus is not in other places, I mention you so you can derive this feedback to whoever is the adequate person 
Keep in mind that the way the manifold extrude works is not considered a bug, it is “as designed”, even when the tool is practically useless in its current form, so this tool is not going to be fixed.
However I know there were some replacements going on since day one after this tools was released because it was obvious to a lot of users that it was not going to work, that’s why I ask about this, but the tool itself does not need a fix, it is working as designed, you cannot overpass an edge or it won’t work basically.
I think you are overestimating the development pace. This is a usability issue. These usually take 3-5 years to address in Blender, if ever. The manifold extrude has been broken for less than 3 years, so I don’t think it’s expected to be fixed or replaced this soon.
Well, it was expected, @mano-wii had already some prototypes and designs for a better tool that could replace it, and honestly I would vote to remove the manifold extrude instead of leaving as it is since the expectation by the users are too high and in the end it can never be used in real situations.
Now, if it’s going to be replaced anytime soon or not, it’s been a lot of time since the tool was released, but in any case I’m not pushing for it’s replacement with these messages and question, I’m just asking for the status and about what can we expect, if the result is that we should not expect anything, ok, but it’s good to know the actual status
All improvements depend heavily on if a developer is willing (and has the time and means) to carry them through to the end. I don’t know why @mano-wii 's prototype isn’t finished yet. Maybe he hit a snag somewhere. Some thing that is very hard to solve. And he got discouraged for a while. Maybe he hit a difficulty somewhere which feels pointless to solve now because you know (as a coder) the area is being worked on and the situation will be very different in a year or so.
@Ace_Dragon is right, blender is a real FOSS project, as in there are lots of developers who give their free time to it of their own volition and when they feel like it. For me (as a coder and contributor) that is a good thing. I can understand that is annoying when things inevitably stall quite often, but I’m not sure how to achieve this mythical PGOS (and frankly the terms seemingly implied disdain for FOSS slightly annoys me).
On the one hand I can understand peoples grumpyness about something that seemed to nearly be working as needed and then not make it. But on the other hand the loud complaining would make me afraid to (hypothetically) work on this project, for fear of feeling the ‘righteous wrath’ when I don’t succeed.
I’m not really sure how to solve these situations. I just would like to remind people that being grumpy about something doesn’t always have the desired effect… (Though sometimes it probably has 
)
I get your point, but I would like to point out two things:
1.- @mano-wii is an official developer part of the main development team of Blender, up to my knowledge he is officially working in Blender, it’s not just a contributor that offers his free time.(I can be wrong, but I see his weekly reports, and usually that’s an indicator that he is in the main team as a part or full time paid developer).
With that said, this means nothing more than that is why I’m asking about this, because some where in the official planning this was at some point planned or at least sketched, so would be good to know the status, since it’s a very useful modeling tool once it’s correctly done, but with no other idea behind, the status can be “for the time being this is not going to evolve”, good enough to know it, no problem with that.
2.- In general I don’t see grumpiness in the latest messages of the thread, if you go back to September 2020, when I created this thread, maybe you can find something, but this has a history of an existing patch that was working way better than the new one, but made by a contributor, and there were reasons to discard that patch, but the functionality was greatly reduced, so there was a bit of controversy, on the other hand what I see is a user that is waiting for this to improve and is asking about it after more than 2 years, but he asks for it with a bit of despair, but respectfully, there are without a doubt other threads where you can see a lot of grumpiness XD, but I think this is not the case
You can also see how my message of January 2021 remains unanswered, yet I’m not angry or grumpy for that, it’s like when you send a friendly reminder about something to a co-worker or a friend, it’s important but not urgent, however it could be something good to know.
I hope you understand my point here.
In this case, getting it right is simply implementing Germano’s design for prismatic extruding (which fixes the core complaint regarding this tool). I do agree that we should not be too pedantic and/or demanding in terms of standards, but this is a very obvious usability issue that has led to people believing it is broken and should be removed. I disagree with the part about removing it not only because it is actually useful in a few cases, but because I would prefer an effort to fix what is there rather than Blender getting a reputation for a feature set that is in flux (ie. volatile, you never know if it will still be there in the next release).
As for PGOS vs. FOSS, keep in mind that the BF has been presenting Blender to the 3D industry as a viable alternative to the commercial solutions (ie. a professional tool) as opposed to a passion project made by a group of 3D enthusiasts. If Blender was the latter and made it clear that attracting professionals and studios was not a major goal, then the dynamics in terms of feedback would look a lot different.
Certainly the interest shown by the community is important to keep things flowing.
I haven’t read the entire thread, but I can clarify a few things.
Patches involved:
https://developer.blender.org/D12698
https://developer.blender.org/D12421
Related links:
https://developer.blender.org/differential/query/Enkn5WU1Do7m/#R
Thanks @mano-wii foe the clarification, that’s what I was asking for
Regarding the tool I don’t think the Boolean path is the correct one, while it can be useful none of the tools I tested on other softwares work in a Boolean fashion, or that is not the impression by the user, it works more like the old path or the Addon that exists that does what we would expect, so I’m suspecting that there is a bit more logic and it’s more like a negative extrude with some analysis to clean up the bad result of the negative extrude
Also good to know what is exactly your role in the official team, however IMHO could be great to have you as an active developer of the modeling tools team, since you are doing a pretty good job with other patches in similar areas, like the ones for the snapping
Hey! Don’t you go chasing people away from triaging! , did you look at the size of the bugtracker?! (just kidding of course, though partially serious in that I think blender needs active triagers more than active developers atm) .
Hi,
what happened to this? It’s been 2 and half years since the extrude manifold tool got in, and I just checked 3.5, and it still doesn’t work even in most trivial cases. I am confused because in other threads, I am seeing the developer working on completely different tools, yet here we have over 2 years old tool still not working as expected ever since it was launched. By that I mean not only that it doesn’t work currently, but that it never ever worked.
It’s getting very concerning with Blender being filled up with tools which give it certain capabilities on paper, but then the user finds out those capabilities are not real. They are showcased in the marketing material but they aren’t really functional.
Sir Any update, How to check new updates!
