-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.4k
Rename "labeled asset" to "subasset". #22666
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
andriyDev
wants to merge
4
commits into
bevyengine:main
Choose a base branch
from
andriyDev:label-to-subasset
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+604
−508
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
576d975
Rename every "label" in `bevy_asset` to "subasset".
andriyDev aba3dd5
Rename every "label" in `bevy_gltf` to "subasset".
andriyDev 1703094
Update the examples to use the GltfSubassetName.
andriyDev b2abd9a
Write a migration guide.
andriyDev File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
"Name" vs "label" is a bit of an interesting question. "Name" has a "canonical-ness" to it that "label" does not. Label was initially chosen because we thought we might eventually want to support multiple labels per asset.
In practice, that never ended up being very important, and label has served as a unique / canonical identifier. In that context, "name" makes more sense.
Additionally, with our current implementation and culture, I think subasset is clearly the better name than "labeled asset".
However we also have the upcoming "assets as entities" to consider. And as discussed above,
Nameis already a Bevy concept / component. Depending on how we choose to represent "asset entities" and "subasset entities",Namemay or may not make sense in that context. I suspect it will (and the tooling benefits we get from that approach are extremely compelling), but that is uncharted territory.Additionally, with "assets as entities" we might choose represent subassets as children. In that context, it might make more sense to call them "child assets" rather than subassets. Or we might choose to add a new SubassetOf Relationship (perhaps freeing up ChildOf for representing asset "scene hierarchies" directly). The "assets as entities" world might need a whole new set of entity / relationship APIs that replaces the current API.
The point is, we have big changes on the horizon that could very well affect the terminology here, and are likely to break these exact asset APIs. I'm not sure it makes sense to make these "superficial" breaking changes now. I'd rather direct this energy toward spec-ing out what the "assets as entities" data model / terminology looks like.