Re: [Ginp-developers] Version 0.2 is released

[Justin <ju...@sq...>]

Doug Culnane wrote:
> I thought about this on the way to work this morning and came to the 
> same conclusion.  Next release will have a ginp-src-v0.21.zip, 
> ginp-src-v0.21.tgz and a ginp.war file.

Ok not a bad idea.

> 
>>
>>     We want to go for the simplest possible install.  It's ok to make 
>> developers and those who want to build it themselves do a little more 
>> work.  However, regular users, who may not even know Java, who just 
>> want to download it and get the app to work should just be given a 
>> single bundled war to download so that they can copy ginp.war into the 
>> war dir and have it work without having to be aware of classpaths, 
>> etc.  8 megs is not a lot these days.  I think that we are done 
>> growing for a while unless we add a db persistance layer.
> 
> 
> If we split it it will be half the size (~4 MB).
	
I'm all for the src/war split but include the libs in the war, even if 
it makes it huge because the users are going to have to download the 
libs anyway to make the web-app work so we might as well make it easy 
for them.

> 
> Using the standard encoder is more elegant than my encoding.  I was 
> confused because the links were passed through an encoder but it did not 
> do the + char.   I can confirm that it works with my test files with 
> funny names.  The German Chars do not work.  I tried changing the 
> URLDecoder.decode(parameterValue,"UTF-8"); methods to ISO-8859-1 but it 
> did not help.

http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.4.2/docs/api/java/net/URLEncoder.html says 
that UTF-8 oughta work.  They even use a u with two dots on top in the 
example.  You should see what it goes into the encoder as and comes out 
as.  The URLEncoder URLDecoder should reverse each other perfectly.

> What are your thoughts on changing page 4 of the set up wizard to a 
> "Congratulations click here to go to the home page"  We change the home 
> page to be a bit more sexy and/or clearer.  We drop the select a style 
> per collection option.  This makes it clearer, and simpler.  We could 
> also use the style of the home page for the wizard so it looks more like 
> part of the delivered application rather than an add on.

I think the home page could use some cleaning up.  It's a little plain 
right now.  We could also change the style of the homepage to look like 
the setup. :)

> 
> You mention db.  What are your thoughts on this?  I want to avoid a db 
> because it is something else to set up and it makes moving pictures 
> complex.  I like the idea of using a file manager for managing files.  A 
> desktop program like gimp for editing pictures and a web application for 
> presenting them.  I think that if the data is on the disk with the 
> picture it is easy to move it with the picture file.  I also think that 
> the XML data can be parsed and an made into an in-memory searchable 
> index.  However searching and sorting data is a job for a database.  
> What do you think?
> 

I don't want to do a DB either unless it does something really useful 
for the app.  Blojsom is a good example of not using a db.  Of course I 
also don't want to re-invent the db if we need it.  If we want to do a 
search engine we can use Apache Lucene or we can use a db if there's a 
feature it's be really good for like picture rating.