Namespace in production


#1

Hello

I’m curious how all of you all handle namespaces in your production workflow.

I’m wondering if there is a more “clean” way to go about how we do it.
The flow looks like this:

  • First we reference all models into the rig scene. All models get one namespace
  • Then everything gets published
  • In the anim scene we reference the rig. Everthing gets the same namespace, except the models who get double namespace (both model and rig namespace)

The models inside the rig looks like this once everything is references in the animation scene:
car_rig_v01:carInterior_model_v01:main_grp
car_rig_v01:carExterior_model_v01:main_grp

A more clean namespace in the anim scene would of course be car_v01:main_grp. But im not sure how to do this since i need namespacing in the rig file to avoid nameclashing?

Thankful for help on how to set up a working namespace workflow!

Cheers
Olle


#2

I’m not sure there is any perfect way to handle namespaces. Many have pros and cons.

An approach I’ve seen is to “merge” them: Everything is put under a root node and namespaces are merged: car:int:main_grp become car:int__main_grp. This is done automatically at rigging release (implying rigging is a script).


#3

Thank you for your reply! Interesting to merge the namespaces for sure. Makes it a bit cleaner, but maybe harder to script?

Im trying to decide between the following.

ALT_1 (asset description inside namespace. “rig”, “model” etc)

ALT_2 (merged namespace) (no description of asset)

ALT_3 (not merged) (no description of asset)

ALT_4 (asset description outside of namespaces)

ALT 4 seems kind of clean. But maybe a bad idea to have have different naming of the topgroup of each asset? (model_grp, rig_grp and so on). If they are always called “root_grp” (no matter what type of asset) I guess it would be easier to script.

Best regards
Olle