[Feature] Improve UI: current workflow is not user-friendly

Open
#29 1 comment 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

Assessment

Difficulty
5/5
Estimated time
Over a week
Newbie friendliness
35/100
Issue type
Feature
Clarity
Needs clarification
Activity status
Quiet
Tech stack
blender, python
Domain
backend, desktop

Research direction

Start by mapping how the Blender addon currently installs, locates, and starts the solver engine, then trace the simulation lifecycle for scene transfer, parameter updates, and frame retrieval. Done means a single compatible setup, automatic version checking and connection, and implicit data flow during simulation, but the issue does not identify files or tests to run.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Description

deferred enhancement
Motivation
  • Two separate setups are required: deploying the solver engine and installing the Blender addon.
  • Version sync between the engine and the addon is left to the user, and mismatches are easy to produce.
  • The user must specify the path to the solver engine, start the server manually, and establish the connection by hand.
  • Scene transfer, parameter updates, and per-frame result fetching are all manual actions during simulation.
Proposal

Bring the setup and runtime experience closer to a native Blender physics system:

  1. Single install path that covers both the addon and a compatible solver engine, with version compatibility guaranteed.
  2. Automatic version handshake; no manual pinning.
  3. Zero-config connection: the addon launches and connects to the engine on its own when a simulation is run.
  4. Implicit data flow: scene transfer, parameter updates, and frame retrieval happen automatically as part of the simulation lifecycle.
Alternatives Considered
  • Keep the current workflow and improve documentation only. Lowers the learning cost slightly but does not remove the structural friction.
  • Add a "quick start" wizard on top of the current architecture. Helpful as a stopgap, but still exposes the split between addon and engine.
Additional Context

N/A

Contribution Agreement
  • I confirm that any content I submit in this issue may be used, reproduced, modified, and distributed by this project under the project license or as otherwise described in CONTRIBUTING.md.
Dominant language
Python
Stars
4.5k
Forks
334
No merged PRs in 30d

Contributor guide

Open the contributing guide

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

More from st-tech/ppf-contact-solver

All issues in st-tech/ppf-contact-solver

Similar issues

More Python issues

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.