Thx for the reply
Mmkey, btw I was saying to not use that… for simplicity also!
Yep! I also said I didn’t figure out at 1st glance the diff between the 2 repos… The one the latest is the one that’s interesting me, whatever where to pull updates!
It’s not just for sake of complexity, of course, but in contrary to facilitate the update and maintenance!
Having a 1 big file with everything in it is more error prone with git and eventually several people working on it at the same time.
On the other hand, splitting this into separated files (1 for each class by ex) makes easier contrib, imho.
This is why I suggested to cook that in the separated UI.js repo and not in three.js editor’s libs folder…
Btw it was only a suggestion and an offer to manage it myself, not a “please do that” request!
Another point is that finally I’m already trying some additions to editor, but this UI.js way of coding stuff is way too much lines of code or to write a class for each Object3D or not easily extendable/dynamically updatable…
We may need to improve UI.js this much that finally (for sake of simplicity) I suggested to use another one. Especially if the independent UI.js repo is not intended to evolve (I mean by itself, outside of three.js as a standalone UI lib for other projects).
This being said, I’m totally OK to keep UI.js and make it evolve a bit, that’s why I spoke about doing that in the external repo to enable UI.js to be used as a 1st class standalone UI lib… And then imported back as a 1 file in three.js editor, keeping it simple…
Yes… But it might be not possible to add every improvements as is, sadly