Archipack free removal

Sadly, Blender-Archipack “official” version 1.2.8x was removed from blender 3.x series

We should stay away from even the slightest impression that contributors to Blender have monetary benefits with related side business. You would want that from others too (fluids, render engines, asset packs, game mods, modeling tools, plant growing addons, etc).

  • Ton -

Be assured, this rule will not apply to financial contributors.

1 Like

Well that’s an odd decision for a software that relates to or is funded by big names that could give this impression - and not just a slight one furthermore. :thinking:

Also, is this really a good reason in the first place? I can understand one would not want to give a chance to transmit such impression, but is the solution to just drop features? Couldn’t it just be to change the way things are presented and communicated?

I guess the decision is already made and set.

Surely I am misunderstanding this: Does this mean if you are the author of a commercial Blender addon you shouldn’t be contributing to the Blender codebase?

For contributors to Blender that means that they decide to contribute unconditionally, fully Free and open, without other motivation than making Blender better. Aside of hundreds of volunteers, over 30 people do this already within a paid job (20 via BF, 10 via other organizations).

Best regards,

I guess Nvidia people involved are not motivated by other things than throwing love to blender ?

While I understand some addons being removed, like blenderkit, archipack even if an old version, was fully functional and a great addition to Blender. This move is just mind boggling…

You are misunderstanding. This applyes to only add ins that cone with blender, they must follow certain rules, this is one of them

1 Like

I guess the free here is as in freedom as the paid jobs at the BF are indeed paid (and I guess those paid people wouldn’t contribute that much if funding stopped). A link to a better version to get funding keeps your freedom, so the argument is poor I think, but I can understand it looks better to not have Blender to start getting links to paid products everywhere, which would happen at some point if you allow it. Still, it would be great to have the help go both ways to make it sane.

Blender has 2 important types of contributions. The code contributions and the money contributions. Currently, only the later ones get advertisement touching millions of followers through all the possible channels. I think nobody would argue that those companies are cleaner on a moral/spiritual/legal level and thus would owe to have a better treatment. On top of that, even if their funding represents 0.000001% of their monthly income and they decide to stop funding a few month later, they still will have benefited from a nice washing of their image, a lot of visibility and a lot of advertisement. When a solo developer gives a part of his work to the BF, it represents much more to him in proportion than a few 0.0001%.

I’m ok to keep Blender free of ads and links to paid stuff. Ton could still help solo code contributors who do at least as much and proportionally much more with tweets, etc. to help them back?

1 Like

That’s why Maya will remain the central software and the standard for the pipeline for a long time. Because you can plug in all the biggest commercial addons that are essential for the film industry. It’s kind of shooting yourself in the foot. :roll_eyes:

Just to make a bit of clarification. Archipack auhtor had a documentation link to GitHub, where it linked to the Gumroad page where he sells the add-on. So technically he was doing the same as others do (including BlenderKit, where I’m the founder), and that is giving something for free while selling a higher version of the same product. Even if it’s questionable how much that is being commercial, e.g. I didn’t myself know the addon has a commercial version.
Even with that, I totally understand this discussion happening, since it’s a bit hard to understand if you 're not deep into what open source means.

You can however use any commercial or non-commercial addons you like, contrary to what some people here mention. It’s just that Blender Foundation doesn’t want to distribute these addons themselves.

You can e.g. download BlenderKit from :wink:

Glass there is talk about the BLender Extensions, probably will take quite a while. But i am curious if this will see daylight. I can understand that S Leger has a dent in heart now. I can understand Blender point of view as well.

1 Like

But Archipack free (community edition) is still available, you just have to install it yourself like a number of other free add-ons, or indeed the paid ones. As Hugo says, rules apply for add-ons to be distributed with Blender. Any add-on that is now, or may be distributed with Blender in the future, then subsequently becomes commercialised must be removed from the Blender distribution. It can still be made available by the developer, just not distributed with Blender.
The difference is subtle, but important.