GLTF: Add a comment for skinned mesh tree placement

[aaronfranke]

This PR adds a comment explaining why we generate an empty node here. The reason is not obvious from just reading the code, so we need to have a comment explaining why we do this.

[fire]

Since this is sensitive code, I think adding the comment is enough.

Edited:

The code compression is not worth it, because the previous code is straightforward to parse.

In this section of the gltf code we repeated the same code three times and that was easiest way to verify the correctness.

You only modified one of the three.

[fire]

We discussed there's a tradeoff between small bug fixes and large overhauls. Since this code is load bearing, smaller changes aren't worth doing the validating for correctness.

@aaronfranke wanted to make a new proposal.

The current discussion is about enhancing the Godot game engine's handling of GLTF nodes. Presently, Godot can only generate one node from a single GLTF node JSON, which limits the creation of complex structures without code duplication.

The proposed solution is to modify the code to allow multiple Godot nodes from a single GLTF node JSON. This would enable creating intricate structures like a physics body with various components without repeating code.

There's also concern about backward compatibility. Some believe the old method should not be preserved, while others suggest an import option for backward compatibility. The consensus is to treat this as a significant version change that upgrades with a checkbox. While the need for change is agreed upon, the specifics are still under discussion.

Summarized by ai

[fire]

We discussed there's a tradeoff between small bug fixes and large overhauls. Since this code is load bearing, smaller changes aren't worth doing the validating for correctness.

@aaronfranke has a proposal to modify the code to allow multiple Godot nodes from a single GLTF node JSON.

[fire]

@lyuma I think this is good now. Can you check?

[lyuma]

Looks great. This was indeed one of the trickier edge cases and you'd otherwise have to git blame to find the PR and the linked issue with the particular testcase that led this to be added.

[YuriSizov]

Thanks!