This post mentions Entities 0.50 and 0.51 (compatible with 2020 LTS and 2021 LTS respectively).
As of today, Entities version is 0.5**.1** (compatible with 2020 LTS I suppose but not 2021 LTS).
Or is it?? :p:smile::):(
Versions 0.50 and 0.51 don’t make any sense, really. That would indicate a minor version bump of +45 (!) from the current Entities version 0.5.x!!
Please update the post to clarify this, it’s confusing. People already started replicating these 0.50 and 0.51 version numbers in their posts which - I presume - do not exist! At least not until around 2044 …
There is nothing confusing about it.
0.5 is a REALLY old version.
0.50 is the latest and 0.51 will come out in Q2.
Please put this 0.5 and 0.50 confusion to rest, we had a whole thread getting derailed because of it.
I don’t want to be pedant but, a confusion is a confusion, how can someone that’s confused put the confusion away without asking and correcting the confusion in the first place??
There’s an error in the docs UI, I’d appreciate if people would read posts more carefully before reacting with something that to be frank, it is not helping either to clear someone’s else confusion nor unity to improve.
@UnityStaff: please make sure the dropdown in the entities package docs orders the versions correctly no matter which version are u currently at. For example, if u are on 0.50 (latest) page, the dropdown has 0.50 at the top, but if u are on any other version’s page, say 0.9, then the dropdown will list 0.50 between 0.5 and 0.6.
Since a really big chunk of people don’t bother using links from the unity editor and just uses a web search, they are bound to land on a random version and thus get a wonky dropdown order.
Developers should actually know that version numbers are not decimal numbers, but independent numbers separated by dots, it may well be easier for me since I come from a country where commas are used for decimal places, not dots. Unfortunately, I see too often that people struggle with this.
But if someone confuses versions 0.5.1 with 0.51, then this person should see an ophthalmologist. (0.51.0 would be correct)
Does that work with the subscene workflow? I have the opposite situation. I have GameObject vehicle physics, and want to use subscenes to load only “tiles” around the player, but want to have colliders on those loaded subscenes. My understanding is that the subscenes are pure entities, and that’s why they are so fast. And does the GO attached to your vehicle automatically track with the entity updates, or is that something that has to be coded?
Just in case, let me say that gameobject physics and entity physics (dots physics package) are independent engines and will not interact with each other.
Folks, was anyone able to attend to unity roadmap session at GDC? Anything interesting to share?
It’s usually safe to assume that I don’t know what I’m talking about, but in this case I do understand the separation between GO and entity physics. What I would like to do, which may turn out to be a terrible idea, is divide my scene into hex cells, and save each of those into a sub scene. I only load the player cell + the ring around the player (maybe by direction so only 3) and the rest are represented by billboards/impostors. For my vehicles that are outside the player’s view or at LOD1+, I use an entity system that moves them along my road lanes (which have already been converted to entities – I have this system up and running already) by direct manipulation of the position and rotation, no physics. When they move into the players view, I want to transition to full-fidelity vehicle physics, but my engine is based on GameObjects, so when I load the subscenes, I need the colliders that the GameObjects physics can work with.
If my vehicle physics was using DOTS, I’d be all set. I don’t know if it’s reasonable to expect a full vehicle physics to be performant enough to handle 100s of vehicles even under DOTS, so it may not be a reasonable expectation that the authors of those systems would eventually port them. But I’d love to be proven wrong.
Apologies for hijacking the thread. I had put my entities work aside to make some progress on vegetation over the last few months (hobby project, limited time), so I was very excited to see this announcement about 0.50 and the forthcoming 0.51 with 2021 support.
I have to say in defense of the other guy that if people have been talking about 0.5.1 all the time and someone writes suddenly 0.51 I’m going to guess its a typo.
Next case where confusion is possible is if you saw 0.5.1 long time a go and come back after several months of doing other stuff related to some other project you might not realize they are different. Because was there a dot or not.
Of course you might say that in that case you should go see a doctor about memory issues, but I’ll then have to remind you that not all of us have a photographic memory.
Its unreasonable to demand people to remember things like machines. A lot of the people seem to forget everything that happened in the meeting the very next day.
It’s really concerning what Unity has done so far by halting DOTS Visual Scripting & DOTS Audio(DSPGraph) & DOTS Animation until after 1.0, then they will think what they are gonna do with them right after 1.0 is released. Considering that they are still in experimental stage, I’m starting to have panic attacks and imagining the worst scenario possible; Death (deprecation).
This is a chart that shows how Unity deals with experimental packages:
I’m pretty sure the “D” path is the incremental improvements to released packages. There is nothing unusual or alarming on that flowchart. All software follows some form of that flow.
Even the poor choice of extremely low-contrast colors for the arrows is, sadly, not unusual in the software industry.
Trivial changes sounds about right (and doc updates, omg!). Every time Unity releases a 1.0 feature, the typical reaction is “Well, this is promising, but still needs a lot of work”, and then all it gets is “trivial changes”, for years.
1.0 for Unity is not a solid base to build and improve upon, it’s a “we’re done with this now, cya!”.
In any case, regardless of that flowchart (because we could keep arguing about it and derail the thread to completely off topic), I do maintain that I hope that DOTS 1.0 is as close to complete as possible, because their track record with post 1.0 features is horrible.
So the more major changes follow paths C or B. It’s nothing different than any other group that manages published software does, and is following the Semantic Versioning principles.
Whether or not they are guaranteeing to do any upgrades is another matter. The diagram is simply documenting the process that will be followed if they do.
DOTS animation has been and continues to be developed in parallel.
It is not in a state of being at 1.0 when Entities 1.0 ships. We are building a quite extensive tech stack for DOTS animation including all new tooling all kinds advanced runtime animation features etc. Timelines for the two didn’t align and we didn’t want to delay Entities 1.0 until animation is fully shippable.
