[Clusterviz-devel] Re: divided clusterdisplay

[K. W. <k.w...@gm...>]

Hello!

Jonas Maaskola wrote:
>>>  - the other named glutwin manages the trackball and the clusterdisplay
>>>    and the GLUT callbacks. It does some thread management, too.
> 
> 
> That is ok in principle. But can we please find another name for this class? I 
> do not like how it has that "-win" suffix which seems to be used 
> ubiquituously in the MS Windows world. Maybe be more verbose and use "window" 
> or something the like or rename it to something similar. (Maybe it is plain 
> silly to whine about variable names - but hey we are free to choose them!)

I'll do this next time I work on the code. By the way, could we rename 
"auxiliary", too? It reminds me on one book on functional analysis I had 
to work with. It had a section titled "the most important theorems on 
functional analysis". It sounds interesting, but you don't know what's 
in it unless you look into it.

Since auxiliary contains data related functions, maybe "data.py" would 
be appropriate?

> There were indeed some other errors introduced as you seem not to have worked 
> on the most recent revisions. I noticed that changes to scripts/clusterviz 
> which I had commited in revisions 116 and 121 were not anymore in the code. 
> So I had to recommit that stuff. Please make sure always to work on the 
> newest revisions - especially before commiting.

Sorry about that. I will use the svn work copy from python from now on 
(that is, I will not call setup.py install anymore). When there's only 
one clusterviz installation on my PC, confusions like that should not 
happen again.

> 
>>> The trackball class has been cleaned up and the clusterviz script adapted
>>> to employ the glutwin class instead of the clusterdisplay class. I know you
>>> wanted more atomic commits, but I did not know how to split this step into
>>> smaller ones.
> 
> 
> Could you please verify that issues like the one I found and described above 
> did not happen to other parts of the code? I will look into that too, but 
> having more eyes check it would be better. Yet, as far as I can tell from the 
> diff between revision 124 and 125 nothing else of this kind has happend.
> 

I think the clusterviz script was the only not-up-to-date file I used. I 
did call svn update before commiting, but since the python scripts are 
stored in a different place ($(python)/scripts) than the package itself 
($(python)/lib/site-packages/clusterviz), there must have gone something 
wrong.

> Using this new directory strucutre we could for example introduce now a 
> 0.2-release-candidate branch to make it really stable and robust so that it 
> reaches release quality. The question would then be whether we wait until 
> Karsten's present work is finished or whether we want to release the prior 
> state as 0.2 and have his work lead to 0.3. What do you think?

I will continue next Sunday. I hope to get it done then, but it seems a 
bit involved.. So if you want to release this week, don't wait for me...

Regards,
Karsten.
--
Wikar, der Desktop-Wiki: http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~kweinert/wikar/