please delete this thread if the other posters agree to delete it as well
linvanchene
Posts: 1,382
edited and removed by user
Post edited by linvanchene on
Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
7533 S Center View Ct #4664
West Jordan, UT 84084
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
modo users have had to wait for several plug-ins to be updated for the new 801 version - in one case we are still waiting. Most Photoshop plug-ins do work after updates, but that's because the Photoshop plug-in API is quite simple and restrictive - things like Phototools which duf more deeply often did need an update, usually after the PS update.
edited and removed by user
In most cases it can't be helped that the USERS have to wait a bit until the DEVELOPERS received the updates to the SDK and are done working with it.
But that is not the topic and the issue in question.
The issue is that based on the information available on the forum the last SDK was released on
08-16-2012 05:56 PM
This was about TWO YEARS AGO...
Now it could be that the SDK was silently updated.
But all the information I received so far point in the direction that this is NOT the case and that in fact all plugin developers are working with an SDK that is far behind 4.6.3.52.
If you prefer yes or no questions:
Is the latest released DAZ Studio SDK 4.6.3.52?
And if you prefer open questions:
What is the version number of the latest DAZ Studio SDK?
What is the date of the latest update of the DAZ Studio SDK?
- - -
As a fellow DAZ/Octane Render user I'd like to also request more support for 3rd party developers. I think this might help expand the range of customers that would shop at DAZ. A two year old sdk and limited documentation about new DS updates isn't very helpful for 3rd party developers.
Agree with the basic sentiment here - we need DAZ to keep the SDK up for Octane. That might represent a large audience for DAZ as well, which means it appears to be in your best interest to work with the Octane plug-in developer. Could be I'm missing something.
An updated SDK means:
1) At best, anyone using an older version of Studio can't use the plugins compiled with the new SDK.
2) At worst, all users must get new versions of all plugins.
#1 is annoying for the people who don't want to be on the latest version of DAZ Studio, and #2 is awful(lot of work) for plugin developers and users.
The Octane developer has been in direct contact with the DAZ development team. Nothing directly communicated thus far has lead us to believe an updated SDK is needed for Octane.
edited and removed by user
I am glad we can agree that constantly "updating the SDK" in regards to the binary compatibility is not a good thing.
I am glad we can agree that improvements can be made in regards to helps for developers.
The real issue here is that plugin development is difficult and is almost always fraught with delays and setbacks. You have this idea that DAZ is responsible for those delays and setbacks. I doubt I can convince you otherwise, but in this case you are mistaken.
I'm not sure whether this is accurate because I had to upgrade to the latest version of DS to use Measure Metrics and if you read certain product information they're only guaranteed to work with DS from a specific point release. That suggests that DS has altered significantly enough between point releases to prevent certain products from working. If this is the case then why not update the SDK so every developer is developing on the same playing field? I own Photoshop plugins that continue to work across different point updates and new full versions of PS - sometimes this is a free or paid upgrade for new full releases.
Maybe the underlying issue in this communication is that the term SDK - Software Development Kit is used differently by different companies.
It seems that DAZ uses the term SDK in reference to the core of the code that needs to be stable because a lot of different plugins will use it. And of course you are completly right that should not be changed every other week.
BUT
When I speak of Software Development Kit I mean the collective of every single bit of information that is provided to developers to work in an efficent way.
I consider the SDK the collection of all useful files, background information, manuals, wiki pages, in depth description of the technology the company uses.
Of course you cannot hand out that information to anyone. But at least trusted 3rd party developers should have access to the latest information under a Non Disclosure Agreement.
- - -
As an outside spectactor I can observe that not only one but several 3rd party developers seem to use a LOT more time to keep their plugins up to date for DAZ software in comparison to Poser versions.
- The reality 3 plugin for poser was released a long time ago while the DAZ version seems still to be under development.
- The OctaneRender plugin for Carrara was announced months ago and still there is no test version in sight.
- The OctaneRender v2.0 plugin for DS is not ready while the poser plugin is out now.
- - -
So do you think that this is just a coincidence that several 3rd party developers seem to have issues with DAZ versions of their plugins?
Do you truely believe that there is nothing further DAZ can do to make the life of 3rd party developers easier?
Do you truely believe that there is no additional information that DAZ could share with 3rd party developers in order to prevent that a lot of development time is wasted?
- - -
Well maybe behind the scenes everything is working completly perfect and the real issue is that just noone is allowed to talk about what ya all are really working on because of Non Disclosure Agreements.
But to me on the outside it really looks like there might just be some room for improvement.
Poser SDK is updated more frequently because it integrates with other software such as VUE. Both of which have recently had full version updates. DS on the other hand doesn't seem to focus on updates and integration with 3rd party software like Poser does.
Measure metrics is a plugin that required features that where implemented after 4.5 shipped. Almost all plugin developers want their plugins to work in prior versions(as far back as possible).
Different SDK's have different binary compatibility rules with corresponding different benefits and drawbacks. As an example 3dsMax is binary compatible across releases, while Maya plugins must be recompiled for every major version(2013, 2014, 2015, etc). Photoshop is usually binary compatible across releases, but not always. They sometimes remove functionality, such as the ADM manager a few years back.
I'm not sure whether this is accurate because I had to upgrade to the latest version of DS to use Measure Metrics and if you read certain product information they're only guaranteed to work with DS from a specific point release. That suggests that DS has altered significantly enough between point releases to prevent certain products from working. If this is the case then why not update the SDK so every developer is developing on the same playing field? I own Photoshop plugins that continue to work across different point updates and new full versions of PS - sometimes this is a free or paid upgrade for new full releases.
I'll agree with Dtamm. There could be 12 millions reasons explaining the delay and the SDK version is the least plausible cause. If Otoy wanted it, I'm sure DAZ would already have given it to them (if it is not already the case, but that you wouldn't know because it was under undisclosure terms)
As for your example in measure metrics, it could be explained by a bug in a function. Correcting it in a point in time inside DS doesn't make any necessity to make a new SDK.
In the same vein, implementing a new function inside DS doesn't mean any developer need a new SDK. Ex : I make a new function to display help tooltip inside DS. Why would an external render engine need a new SDK for a function which is only usefull inside DS?
If you read the DS changelog since two years, there are a lot of fix, some implementations like the CMS being on PostgresQL, and very few on the SDK. A stable SDK that doesn't change is better for devs and users
As for Reality, I have the idea that the dev may be waiting for a stable release of Luxcore API before going on ( new luxrender ). Should I mention that Poser didn't have Reality before v3 too? It's a one guy dev plugin. Can he do all the platforms at the same time?
Same question about Otoy. Wouldn't they concentrate their ressources to some bigger project like Cloud rendering, Brigade, OrbX instead of developing plugin for a niche market?
About DAZ plugin being more difficult to develop, I think it is true because they are done in C++.
And sorry but you can't count Poserfusion as 3r party plugin because it is made by SM. Not a 3rd party dev. So if you take out that, and all the python plugins (which is way simpler than C++). I don't think you can name a lot of plugin developer who would need an up to date SDK for poser. So few plugin = few complains about SDK problem