Before, if an object A was parented to an object B, the instance of A would have no parent.
We are fixing that behavior (as it is breaking rendering when used with glTF) and thus now the instance.parent === source.parent
Before, if an object A was parented to an object B, the instance of A would have no parent.
We are fixing that behavior (as it is breaking rendering when used with glTF) and thus now the instance.parent === source.parent
LOL
Reminds me of the company Accenture back then. They were giving only advices we all already knew about
Are vertices in the child assumed to be in the local space of the parent or in top-level space?
I think this is equivalent to asking: is it
child.parent = parent;
Or
child.setParent(parent);
The former
In the real world it’s: parent.makeChild(partner)
Should there be an option to keep the old behavior for compatibility?
Unless its
//...
protected makeChild(partner) { /*...*/}
And remember always avoid
//...
public makeChild(partner) { /*...*/}
As I consider this behavior a bug, I would not do that. If we have kept the original behavior by default and propose an option to use the new one, I would have been ok.
But here it is clearly a bug that we are fixing. And it is quite simple to restore previous behavior by setting instance.parent = null