Ton’s response to a possible nurbs GSoC proposal http://lists.blender.org/pipermail/bf-committers/2014-March/043101.html
I have seen people work on this topic in the past 10 years, yet nobody could deliver something more usable than what I did in the 90ies… what is still in Blender now. And what I consider not usable either.
For me then the logical question is this: why even bother about Nurbana? That code is also from the 90ies, it is unsupported for 15 years, and I rather only accept a GSoC project from someone when he/she can become a reliable maintainer for it.
Alternative: check on what we need to do for our Curve/Surface object and tools and make a plan of action what to code?
Or: ditch this whole NURBS thing, it’s ancient, it very hard to make usable and far too technical for artists. Everyone’s using hybrid methods (using subsurf approach) now. I know Adesk bought the T-spline, but something similar would be great to look into.
NURBS is also something you can bedtter hide ‘under the hood’ and then make great tools for artists to help them modeling. If you look at Rhino or Maya you can see how they handle it. Which is: tools, tools, and tools. Not technology.
Or, just adding B-spline surfaces (like LW, etc) would make Blender surfaces so much more usable…
I miss this kind of insight or analysis in the proposal. Are you really familiar with the technology? With subsurf, t-spline, nurbs, and all these parametric curve families?