Re: [Statsvn-developers] Chart sizes

[Jason K. <jk...@sh...>]

I don't think changing image sizes should be a priority, nor a configuration
option. 

 

Furthermore, many of the changes that you are making will only make my job
more difficult when splitting the codebase, as these changes should have
been made in StatCVS. Now, if you want to go and change these things as they
help you achieve your goals, then I have no objection to this refactoring
and cleanup once the codebases are split. 

 

I recommend two things: 

1 - help me split the codebases, as I am the currently the bottleneck for
any enhancements and your changes are making my job harder :-) 

(Rename our package to statsvn, take the 0.2.3 version of StatCVS, paste
that in folder statcvs, delete everything you can in statsvn that is
identical in statcvs, refactor all other classes so that statsvn classes
extend statcvs classes and only override what is necessary, etc. )

2 - file patches with StatCVS for issues that you find the QA tools that
enhance performance and maintainability. If accepted, apply them here too. 

 

If we don't do this, we're making strides in the wrong direction. We don't
want to replace StatCVS, we want to extend it. 

 

Thanks,

Jason

 

  _____  

From: sta...@li...
[mailto:sta...@li...] On Behalf Of
Benoit Xhenseval
Sent: November 17, 2006 8:08 PM
To: sta...@li...
Subject: [Statsvn-developers] Chart sizes

 

Hi *,

 

I've reduced some of the warnings by doing a few changes here and there but
nothing to the format.  I agree with Doug, Jalopy would be great to use but
defining the 'standard' could be difficult unles we pick say "sun" standard
+ tabs.

I also had issues with Jalopy in the past as it was always reformatting
everything (we have to run a cvs status first to see the local changes and
then do the format on those only). May be this is fixed in Maven plugin?

 

Quick look at the Checkstyle shows that we have different sizes for charts,
in different locations.

i.e. it is difficult to ensure consistency, furthermore it is not possible
to change it (I think that 640 * 480 is a bit small nowadays)

 

I believe we have the following sizes in use:

- 640 * 480 (when it is 'big', loc, file count, file size, directory size)

- 400 * 300 (loc on main page)

- 500 * 300 (activity charts)

- 640 * 460 (for the author commit activity)

- 450 * x (for the author adding/modifying activity)

 

May I suggest that we rationalise these in 2 categories:

- "big" (LOC, file count, file size, directory size, author commit
activity), e.g. 640 * 480 (although I'd prefer a default of 750 x 562 which
is proportional)

- "small" (loc on main page, activity chart, author adding (just width))
e.g. 500 * 300

- however, anything where the height could vary (depending on number of
developers for instance) would only pick the width.

 

I think that it would be preferrable if all charts on a given page had the
same width.

 

I would also like to make this configurable via the command line parser and
ConfigurationOptions (may be a simple 'profile' that set a default
'ensemble'?)

 

In any case, default behavio(u)r would remain the same.

 

Any objection?

 

Thanks

 

Best regards

 

Benoit


--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.430 / Virus Database: 268.14.6/536 - Release Date: 16/11/2006
15:51