Open source development
Hi,
Why Prusa team doesn't use the power of community development? I see a lot of useful PRs on GitHub (including my own 😊), that have no reaction from maintainers, neither accepting not rejecting. With joining development effort with community PrusaSlicer could become even better.
Little example of such my PR - https://github.com/prusa3d/PrusaSlicer/pull/11107
It adds brim to draft shield, as one loop shield has very bed adhesion:
This PR is almost 5 month old, very small and I guess very useful as well. Any reason to ignore it?
Regards.
RE:
Short story - communication vs project roadmap (see https://github.com/prusa3d/PrusaSlicer/wiki/Contribution-guidelines ):
- you did not create GH Issue first to discuss the feature you want to get, so owners may not be aware of the feature
- project owners may already have a roadmap of features to implement, and your feature could have been considered but rejected, also people are paid to do specific features/bugs prior reviewing other PR's
- in your PR you did not link to issue I mentioned earlier
- in your PR you did not select anyone for review who is in the project, they may be just not aware it is awaiting review (thanks GitHub)
There are possible other reasons, one of the most common are:
- project owners are focused on other things that they don't have time to review PRs
- are not eager to maintain code that was developed by someone else, especially if they do not want it.
Longer story - https://www.hanselman.com/blog/always-be-closingpull-requests (make sure to read linked articles)
Opensource is not always about ability to contribute back to the project, but about the fact that you can make changes if you need them.
See my GitHub and printables.com for some 3d stuff that you may like.
RE: Open source development
you did not create GH Issue first to discuss the feature you want to get
There is no demand or recommendation create first FR for PR. FR is when user wants somebody else to develop, isn't it?
in your PR you did not select anyone for review who is in the project
I just can't do it, Github says "To assign a reviewer to a pull request, you will need write access to the repository."
Opensource is not always about ability to contribute back to the project
Sure, but it would be much better to collaborate with community.
RE: Open source development
Opensource is about collaboration, yes, but it is easier said than done, this is unfortunately quite common pattern among opensource projects. That's why I create an issue and talk with people prior making PR, even if you think it is small ( notice it is way easier to write a code than read it, and there is a lot of other things to do around PR prior merging especially testing on hardware).
Things get really irritating especially when company which owns the project actually has a roadmap of things to do which are higher priorities because of the paying customers (especially corpo). Notice how input shaper was added or UI revamped instead of fixing some other very long standing issues, and that it may make opensource contributors felt abandoned, as in your example.
About Issue First. Creating issue first helps to discuss the idea, especially if this is a feature request. If the project owners are eager to accept such change, then discussion shifts to who will code it. This means that if the owners are not going to accept PR, then there is no point in writing a PR - just keep it in your fork.
About assigning people to review - ah yeah I forgot it works best in the same repo in the organizations, with PR from forks this is unfortunately problematic. Then mentioning users or group in the comments usually helps.
I know it sounds harsh but it's just reality. We know people want to help, but not everyone wants to be helped.
See my GitHub and printables.com for some 3d stuff that you may like.
RE:
I create an issue and talk with people prior making PR,
Well, I don's see too much discussions in FR here. And you already made changes, so why not discuss PR directly?
how input shaper was added
To Marlin? Marlin maintainers (are there only two of them?) actively work with PRs and FRs. I personally have six PRs merged there.
if the owners are not going to accept PR, then there is no point in writing a PR
It's not a big deal to create PR if it's implemented. Developers just want to contribute to maker PrusaSlicer better.
It adds brim to draft shield, as one loop shield has very bed adhesion:
This PR is almost 5 month old, very small and I guess very useful as well. Any reason to ignore it?
For those who really need it it's the sort of thing that's easily implemented in the original CAD so the priority will be low, I use draft shield quite a lot for prints that may warp but the shield has never come free...
If more users pile on to the issue priority may rise.
Cheerio,
RE: Open source development
it's the sort of thing that's easily implemented in the original CAD
Really? Modeling such wall for each model will be easy?
the sheild has never come free...
And in my cases it did, that's why I added brim to the shield. And other people encounter the same thing, see PR comments:
Draft shield itself is prone to warping, so with a small surface on the bed it lifts up quickly ... I've just printed something in ABS using draft shield and it warped like crazy
Cura, by a way, does the same thing.
so the priority will be low
That's the power of community - it's done, just merge, probably asking from author change something. For instance in this case config option "loops" could be removed.
Really? Modeling such wall for each model will be easy?
Trivial, you already know the outer shape so expand and hollow it, likewise with the brim. If it's not your model you will need to drop the 2D outline onto the surface first - or approximate.
Cheerio,
RE: Open source development
Trivial
Instead of having it in slicer automatically?
Instead of having it in slicer automatically?
It's like supports, the best option is always to customise in CAD, the slicer will do it's best but doesn't know your use-case and the automatic implementation is rarely optimal.
Cheerio,
RE: Open source development
It's like supports, the best option is always to customise in CAD
Do you add organic support in CAD? 😮
the automatic implementation is rarely optimal.
You have support blocker and paint on support. I don't you find too much people modeling support in CAD. Most people don't do modeling, just downloading and printing.
RE: Open source development
There are many models available with the support already included. For example many of the models by Fotis Mint
RE: Open source development
There are many models available with the support already included.
It's nice, but most of them not. And don't believe there are many people wanting to add support, brim, shield, etc. in CAD.
It's nice, but most of them not.
Many/most competent 3D print designers will account for support and custom design it if necessary. A high proportion of the designs available on the WWW are not designed by people who understand 3D printing. We see many of them here as problems, hang on; OK that only took a few seconds checking today's Printables posts, look at: https://www.printables.com/model/696525-lets-party This one isn't a support problem but it ignores the requirements for a 3D model, print it and it will fall apart ... the 'designer' is soliciting tips via Paypal in respect of his, er, genius.
And don't believe there are many people wanting to add support, brim, shield, etc. in CAD.
So they will get suboptimal results.
Cheerio,
RE: Open source development
Many/most competent 3D print designers will account for support and custom design it if necessary.
I don't know whether I'm competent or not))). I'm for sure taking in consideration 3D printing limitations, but by no means I want to develop brim/shield/support for each model.
RE: Open source development
Depends where you want to go as a designer. The more often you design supports, the more likely you are to learn how to design supports effectively from other sources. After a while it becomes much easier and adding supports to models becomes more automatic. Adding painted-on supports to models is easy for the user to do, but most casual users don't learn about painted-0n supports, or how to use them, or when to use them.. and when they turn on auto supports, there are so many supports that are added that are unnecessary. This is a problem for models with height as you might have lots of filament in supports you don't need.. and I find tree supports that are tall are not so dependable. So also depends on what penetration you want for your model.
Many/most competent 3D print designers will account for support and custom design it if necessary.
I don't know whether I'm competent or not))). I'm for sure taking in consideration 3D printing limitations, but by no means I want to develop brim/shield/support for each model.
RE: Open source development
- you did not create GH Issue first to discuss the feature you want to get, so owners may not be aware of the feature
Ok, I did. Let's see how it's going 😉
https://github.com/prusa3d/PrusaSlicer/issues/12003