User:Mafm

Contents

[edit] Personal Information

[edit] GSoC (Google Summer of Code) 2008

[edit] Milestones

Milestones include (maybe some of them to be added or removed, to be discussed with the mentors and the community in general):

[edit] ToDo

[edit] To finish GSoC

[2008-07-25 17:01:58]
<brlcad> okay, so requirements
<brlcad> hooking in to the back-end in *some* fashion is definitely one to do so
you can display real stuff
<brlcad> libged has enough for that to be doable now, but your app isn't
supposed to talk to libged directly, it's a bad coupling
<mafm> so I could introduce a class simulating network layer?
<brlcad> *delete* *delete* *delete*  .. heh, yes
<brlcad> doesn't even have to simulate it, on the app side it could be a network
layer using libpkg, but then you'll need to stuf in a server layer that
minimally hooks into libged too
<brlcad> you could do it without the network communication, but the danger there
will be that it really needs to avoid polluting any data types across into the
front end
<mafm> yes, I mean that the app could call this layer, and this layer bind
directly to libged
<mafm> and when the network libs are complete, to use them instead
<mafm> but the rest of the front-end wouldn't be affected
<brlcad> okay, so that sounds like the start of a plan


<brlcad> the other bit I'd like to get a better feel for before gsoc ends is
rbgui customization
<brlcad> i.e. how easy it is to 1) customize the appearance (theme it or
otherwise change how it looks) and 2) add a new control widget (e.g. say you
want a rotating progress indicator)
<brlcad> if that's a huge deal, then rbgui probably isn't a good framework to go
with since the design requirements require a lot of custom interactions and
appearance
<brlcad> somewhere in there is how layout can be controlled too
<mafm> rotating progress indicator?
<mafm> the camera coordinates at the moment?
<brlcad> finally, the last item making sure input controls are "done" .. not
just 90% -- I can redo the entire build system really easily if needed, I can
redo the libged binding easily, can work on logging/console, etc .. but there's
a higher 'expense' to follow how input control works so that part should be near
"done" for the two styles
<mafm> I have been working in something like that (as a window with components,
not a new widget), but I scraped it because in IOE it doesn't seem to be place
for smallish, floating windows
<brlcad> that's because it shouldn't be a smallish floating "window" .. it
should be a control that can go onto a given context
<brlcad> just as an example, say you wanted to draw a simple spinner progress
indicator, like http://www.tmssoftware.com/Images/acp.png down on one of the
buttons or on the top status bar or elsewhere
<brlcad> i'm not saying do that particular control, but need to be able to
evaluate how hard it is to write new controls (so maybe try that one)
<mafm> contexts are minimum half of the window size?
<brlcad> i have a fairly straight-forward sense for how hard that is roughly
with cegui, for example
<brlcad> little to no idea how hard that will be for rbgui
<brlcad> hm? minimum half? (no)
<mafm> in example in IOE, when dragging parts of the greeting card
<mafm> one context was the sheet for the card, another half was the things to
put in there (would be like primitives in our case)
<mafm> IIRC :D
<brlcad> yeah, that was a separate (temporary) context/panel
<brlcad> how much space those take up is content-specific and
application-specific
<brlcad> but yeah, could hold primitives in our case


<brlcad> the last bit I'd add would be to actually do a binary release
<brlcad> for at least one platform
<brlcad> for developers
<brlcad> (to check it out)
[2008-07-25 17:44:33]

[edit] About building system

[2008-07-01 20:30:08]
<brlcad> should work on improving/finishing that build system integration some more too ;)
[2008-07-01 20:31:28]
<brlcad> saving users the need to hunt/download is only a small piece of the reason for including the deps, it should build them if it doesn't find a suitable system version
[2008-07-01 20:32:04]
<brlcad> also, your cmake files presently assume pkg-config, that shouldn't be assumed
[2008-07-01 20:32:13]
<brlcad> (nor required)

[2008-07-01 20:34:38]
<mafm> I'm no expert in building systems, but that could take weeks :S
[2008-07-01 20:35:39]
<mafm> "but" is alias to "but I think" and "because of that" at the same time :)

[2008-07-01 20:35:45]
<brlcad> I don't think anyone here would call themselves a cmake expert :)
[2008-07-01 20:37:03]
<brlcad> it is something that needs to happen earlier rather than later given this tool is intended to become pretty fundamental eventually
[2008-07-01 20:37:37]
<brlcad> minimally document the need somewhere (TODO), but poke on it when you can

[2008-07-01 20:37:56]
<mafm> but I could spend much time with it and miss the milestones with gsoc

[2008-07-01 20:39:14]
<brlcad> i understand, that doesn't change the pressing need for it ..
[2008-07-01 20:39:23]
<brlcad> the longer it's ignored, the harder it will be for whomever does try it
[2008-07-01 20:39:57]
<brlcad> it's part of coding complete
[2008-07-01 20:40:22]
<brlcad> if the build doesn't work cleanly, it's not really usable yet to most of our devs

[2008-07-01 20:40:45]
<mafm> I see

[2008-07-01 20:41:47]
<brlcad> e.g. I can't imagine bob readily being willing to futz with three different build systems plus pkg-config, cmake, and scons
[2008-07-01 20:42:29]
<brlcad> we're used to *zero* effort unless you want to change away from defaults
[2008-07-01 20:43:49]
<brlcad> it's not top-priority in front of the milestone tasks, but it's probably #2 or #3 to have a default-functioning build system regardless of system deps

[2008-07-01 20:44:22]
<mafm> that's fine, but I don't think that it's in the scope of the project to rework whatever building system the dependencies decide to use

[2008-07-01 20:44:38]
<brlcad> so at least document it is what I'm saying, maybe work on it if you take a break from coding

[2008-07-01 20:44:41]
<mafm> especially being an experimental project

[2008-07-01 20:45:38]
<brlcad> fyi, I don't see this as an experiement -- a prototype, sure .. but one with an exceptionally high probability of becoming the foundation for a new GUI
[2008-07-01 20:46:26]
<brlcad> you'd have to mess up in several big ways for it to be wasted effort :)

[2008-07-01 20:47:36]
<mafm> it seems to me that you're relaying on somebody with a weak knowledge of building for such a foundation :P

[2008-07-01 20:48:15]
<brlcad> not relying, just don't want you to blow it off entirely as not your problem
[2008-07-01 20:50:02]
<brlcad> wasn't saying drop what you're doing to work on it, just keep it in mind and poke on it when you can .. and document where things are at

[edit] Log

[edit] August

August 24:

August 20:

August 19:

August 18:

August 17:

August 15:

August 11/12:

August 8:

August 7:

August 6:

August 1:

[edit] July

July 31:

July 30:

July 29:

July 28:

July 25:

July 23:

July 22:

July 21:

July 18:

July 17:

July 16:

July 15:

July 14:

July 11:

July 10:

July 9:

July 8:

July 3:

July 2:

July 1:

[edit] June

June 30:

June 27:

June 26:

June 25:

June 24:

June 23:

June 20:

June 19:

June 18:

June 17:

June 16:

June 14:

June 13:

June 12:

June 11:

June 10:

June 9:

June 8:

June 6:

June 5:

June 4:

June 3:

[edit] May

May 26: