[Skencil-devel] Revitalising Skencil
igor.e.novikov at gmail.com
Wed Sep 22 16:29:05 CEST 2010
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 4:17 PM, Bernhard Herzog <bh at intevation.de> wrote:
> Igor Novikov <igor.e.novikov at gmail.com> writes:
> >> > 2.Source code is separated from other files
> >> A good goal in principle, do you have a list of specific changes
> >> you are proposing?
> > 1. Skencil/, Resources/, Script/ and Plugins/ are moved into src/ folder
> > 2. Lib/ folder is eliminated and all native modules are relocated into
> > Skencil/Modules/ folder
> > 3. Pixmaps/ is moved from Skencil/ into Resources/
> Isn't this a bit much of change for just a minor version number increase
> (0.6.17 to 0.6.18)? The changes are not wrong, they just seem to be a
> bit much.
As we have agreed before revitalized version will be 1.0. I have incremented
application version as 1.0alpha
> > 4. Root "skencil" package is introduced
> What will that mean for Skencil users? Will their startup-scripts and
> third-party scripts and plugins still work?
Internal application structure is not changed. So all scripts and plugins
will be workable.
> > 5. All native extensions source code is relocated in extensions/ folder
> > Also I have moved temporary old description files from root folder into
> > old_files/
> > I have left only README file because it's required for distutils. The
> > should be
> > refactored because some of them are have no sense. For example BUGS is
> > for
> > small console utilities but not for large application. Known bugs should
> > in project
> > bug tracker and there is no sense exposing incomplete bug list in BUGS
> > And
> > the same for other files. I think Skencil project should has a more
> > infrastructure on project web site to provide detailed info for users.
> Likewise perhaps a bit much of a change, although less critical than
> moving the code around. However, updating the content and removing
> obsolete files would of course be fine.
> >> > 3.Proposed source code structure allows launching Skencil using SVN
> >> Directly? Isn't this possible already?
> > Yes, it's possible now. Source code structure is equal to working
> > application. On my computer
> > src/ folder is linked as a 'skencil' in $PYTHON_HOME/dist-packages/ and
> > skencil start script is placed
> > into /usr/bin That's all needed for running SVN copy.
> I think the code should be organized so that even that is not
> necessary. After the necessary build steps -- which only create files
> in the working copy -- it should be possible to start Skencil from that
> working copy.
And this is possible already. I have added skencil-launcher.py to run
application on development stage. For native extensions I will add
custom 'build©' command to automate native extensions rebuild.
> > And of course compiled
> > native extensions
> > are copied into src/Sketch/Modules/ By this way we have accelerated sK1
> > development skipping
> > application build after each code modification.
> I'm not sure I understand how this accelerates things. The only files
> that have to be recompiled are the C extensions and those are not
> modified that often and they won't be compiled automatically either with
> your proposed changes.
We use Eclipse+PyDev+Subclipse for development. Such project structure
allows implementing changes, running application and committing from IDE
without using additional tools. It really saves a lot of time.
I have committed all changes step-by-step and rev.721 can be compiled and
installed for testing (or running from SVN copy). On Ubuntu 10.04 this build
works fine and application can be run without patches.
Next step will be elimination of mixed indents. As have been mentioned
default indent will be 4 spaces.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Skencil-devel