Moving Design Documents out of the Wiki Archive

The UI Project Page links to two documents — UI Paradigms and UI Tab Guidelines — in the wiki archive. There’s some interesting content in that part of the archive, but the signal-to-noise ratio in there makes my nose itch.

Would anyone be opposed to me migrating the still-valid documents to the current wiki? My thought is to move them over as-is and create a design/to-do task for adding prefaces that explains the original when/why/who for each document.

1 Like

This is a known todo see

Which is why I’m offering to do the work. I don’t have time to tackle all of T61097, but I can at least handle the documents that are being actively referenced on phabricator.

With the holidays finally out of the way, I’ve had a chance to get rolling on this. I’ve thrown together some quick drafts on my user page. I’ll tackle the task-creation and work coordination side of things in the next week or so.

Hello @ThatAsherGuy!

I’m a little interested in your view of the task-assignment procedure. I’m still new in this team, although I’m a senior in the SW-business (se my short bio). And I was hoping you could give me some pointers to how the tasks are assigned?
I have been trying to anchor the idea of a simple but purposeful documentation strategy before I dive in helping with architecture and proper use of doxygen. I’ve been talking briefly to @YvesBodson, @Aligorith and @jesterKing. Maybe you can give me a hint of who I missed?

Cheers! :smiley:

PS: (edit)
Oh, and I think copy-and-past old documents is one of the worst mistakes ever in technical documentation. As soon as people realize a document isn’t up to date it’s very hard to sell as a reliable source…

I’ve only been poking around here for a few months; I’m barely a contributor, let alone a team member.

Nathan pointed you to Dalai and Dalai pointed you to Campbell. Give Campbell a chance to follow up on your other threads. I’m not in a position to give you an answer that would supersede anything he’d say.

You’ll have to talk me through your post-script. I can’t tell if you’re criticizing the current state of the legacy design documents or my plan to migrate and contextualize them. I’m just tackling some housekeeping here.

You are right @ThatAsherGuy!

I should have kept the two separate. I was entertaining to many thoughts at one time.

I was just thinking about the risk with copy-paste and the inconsistencies it might lead to.
From experience that takes some planing to not become a clarity an issue. I am also a little troubled by what looks to me like fragmented content. I should have asked if there was some clear plan to avoid this. As in not leaving them without completing the transition to also include corrections to match current state.

My concerns may be off though, since I’m not entirely clear about where to find info on what is actually planned here. If it is so that I have just not learned how to see the plan and structure, please correct me.

Oh, and I did ask you because you are new here, since you still have been her longer than me.
Some initiation questions are better answered from recent memories you know :-).

I do write things a little to fast sometimes, thanks for pointing out the need for improvement on my part.


Hi @JonasPrintzen I am currently over seeing documentation, I am focused primary on end user documentation but if you have any questions let me know. You can talk to me in (@Blendify)

Hi @Blendify!

I have been ill so I think I lost some focus, I’l just try again.

Hope you don’t mind if I start with a little context.

I’m trying to find the best way to get my hands dirty while getting a grip of the whole. I am interested in contributing in C/C++/Python development, build-systems, software architecture and documentation, in that order. I have more than two decades experience in any of those areas, but I find the Open Source community quite different from work and from my experience when I was younger and in Open Source. It’s harder to find ones place.

My current idea is to try to get involved with improving how Doxygen is used to document API’s and software design. My experience with this have shown that proper use of doxygen depends on distinct value. I just started to make a little example to show some of the differences.


  • To whom do I ‘sell’ my ideas before starting any heavy lifting?
  • What is the process for claiming such a task, is the bug-tracker used?
  • Where can I see who else is working on this specifically?
  • What is the normal process with contributions on wiki?
    It’s not generated so I suppose ther’s no patches … or?

I would appreciate a little on-board guidance if possible. If I can just find my place I intend to continue contributing, I have enough spare-time and a lot to give back for the pleasure Blender has given over the years.

Oh, blend-chat is giving me trouble. Can’t seem to get a stable precense…

Hi I think improving our usage of doxygen is a good idea. I would start with making a proposal on discussing what is wrong currently and what needs to be done to improve things. After that, developers can chime in on what they think and once everyone agrees you can start making changes.

The issue with is that we want to make sure to not provide outdated documentation while moving stuff around.

I have answered your questions inline below:

To whom do I ‘sell’ my ideas before starting any heavy lifting?

@ideasman42 has pushed the current Doxygen usage so far. So you would be primarily trying to convince him along with @dfelinto and @jesterKing both act as development coordinators who help push the project in the right direction.

What is the process for claiming such a task, is the bug-tracker used?

Yes, you can claim tasks through Add Action --> Assign/Claim. The bug tracker is used. I am hoping to create more tasks for the documentation project so newcomers can see better what needs to be worked on.

Where can I see who else is working on this specifically?

No one is really focused on doxygen coverage, besides @ideasman42 and even then it is not his main concern.

What is the normal process with contributions on wiki?

Currently getting access is based on an ask and receive model. If you have a proposal and a clear direction that everyone agrees on, an administrator can give you an account.