[Setools] gjallar graphic UI to create a process

[goran at krampe.se]

Hi!

=?ISO-8859-15?B?SGVyYmVydCBL9m5pZw==?= <herbertkoenig at gmx.net> wrote:
> Hello Göran,
> 
> gks> First of all - cool! It is great that you guys are getting into this and
> gks> producing code. And especially Morphic stuff which I probably will stay
> gks> clear of, so that gamefield is yours to play with! :)
> 
> my not so good English translates that into "There's work for You to
> do" :-))

Hehe, well - I more meant that I will not spend any time on Morphic
stuff soon AFAICT.
So it was more like "feel free to come up with good solutions, I will
not have any strong views on the subject". :)
 
> gks> I opened it up, glanced at the source and played with it. The UI "feel"
> gks> didn't work very well with my reflexes - I kept trying to drag the
> gks> stages using normal left mouse button for example. But don't let me
> gks> influence you - others may feel differently.
> 
> I noticed the same after some time, maybe squeakers are deeply formed
> by flaps and the object catalog. I will make both possibilities, so it
> works on drag and on click. Dunno how to do this yet but there are
> enough examples.
> 
> Deep in the future I think this should run in the squeak plugin and in
> a browser we would not try to drag it.

Mmmm, the plugin. Yes. Yummy. :)

> gks> 1. I would like for all classes in Gjallar to retain the Q2 prefix to
> gks> avoid any confusion/collisions and also to make it easy to recognize
> gks> Gjallar classes. We could later make a global change of that prefix at
> gks> any time - the Q2 letters is an internal name from the customer.
> 
> Noticed that after the release. I wonder what MC will make of renaming
> the classes. Duplicate? Will try.

I think it handles it. :)

> gks> 2. You and Balázs both have Morphic tools but two different class
> gks> categories. Either we put them in the same category or we distinguish
> gks> them better IMHO. No biggie.
> 
> They aim at different goals and IMO should be kept in different
> categories.

Then it would be nice if you could name the cats more specifically
somehow. Again, no biggie. :)
 
> gks> 3. Put the Documentation class comment in one of the classes itself
> gks> (like CreateProcessBigUI) instead. Otherwise we will end up with tons of
> 
> Definitely! Needed my bed when I did this :-))

:)

> gks> these "documentation" classes! :) There is only one such "non class" in
> gks> Gjallar and that is Q2Gjallar which holds the license as the class
> gks> comment and class side high level developer doits only.
> 
> I'm not happy with the class names yet and threw it out so it didn't
> get stale here. Having people comment on it gives me little things to
> do without having a lot to think.
> 
> gks> I will wait with merging until the above three things are fixed - if it
> gks> that is ok with you of course. :)
> 
> I'm not sure what I want, as I don't understand the implications yet
> (my first go at MC. Thanks for your intro). My feeling says I'd prefer
> it in different mcz, as I fear if it's drowned in the mcz of the whole
> Gjallar project it will be slow to save and load as MC has to look at
> too many things in doing its work.

Working with Gjallar, which is my largest MC project I think, has shown
that operations are quite fast. I don't think that is an issue.

> I would not mind using your repository and I'll give you a warning
> *before* I start messing with anything of the system. Just to keep
> your integration work at a minimum. I feel the swiki is the wrong
> place for the code.
> 
> What do you say?

Yes, the Swiki is the wrong place. :) Feel free to use the repo in any
case. There are two options here:

1. Use a different PI name (a different package). You do this by
renaming your cats to say "GjallarTool-blabla" and then add a new
package in the Monticello browser called "GjallarTool". Thus your code
will not be in the "Q2" package and can be considered an optional addon
to Gjallar. The positive side is that you are then isolated from Gjallar
- I will not need to merge stuff etc. The negatives are of course:
	- To make adjustments in Gjallar to support your tool you will need to
modify the Q2 package and store such snapshots separately for me to pick
up and merge.
	- Not all people will have your addon in their images so when they hack
on Gjallar they might change stuff you depend on without really knowing.
	- Users will need to "know" which version of GjallarTool works with
which version of Q2.

2. Use the "Q2" prefix like today. Do not bother warning me - you can
make any changes you see fit and save such snapshots to the repo - they
will be marked with your initials and since you write a nice summary
snapshot comment :) I will have no trouble seeing what you have done and
I am free to either merge it in or ignore it. ;)
 
Personally I would prefer for you to take route 2, it is the simplest
and also IMHO I want developers to feel that they can dig in, contribute
and change Gjallar - that it is not *dangerous* to do that, the worst
thing that can happen is that I will not merge it into my "line" and
explain why. ;)

And non merged versions show up in bold in the repository so it is
always very clear what versions are merged in and what are not (from the
perspective of the current version in the image).
 
> Cheers,
> 
> Herbert                            mailto:herbertkoenig at gmx.net

regards, Göran