Modularization/IRCLOGS/20090514.log
(14:56:32) xiuzhi: kr: moin
(14:56:45) _ch_: kr: Morning
(14:57:18) kr: good morning
(14:57:24) liutao: Good morning
(14:58:22) kr: ... ingo has problems logging in ... let's wait for him
(14:58:45) xiuzhi: ok
(14:58:52) _ch_: :)
(15:13:00) is_ [n=is@nat/sun/x-5e60b3bcdbd80b2b] 杩涘叆浜嗚亰澶╁銆?/font>
(15:13:17) is_: Hello, sorry for being late. Some technical problems :-(
(15:13:43) kr: hi ingo, seems you finally made it :)
(15:13:44) liutao: no problem
(15:13:52) xiuzhi: you are welcome. let start
(15:13:56) liutao: ok
(15:14:05) liutao: Agenda:
(15:14:05) liutao: 1.What about the status of our new project "Modularization"(kay)
(15:14:05) liutao: 2.Web Start test "hello world"&"build helper"(liutao,kay)
(15:14:05) liutao: 3."Build Helper" Spec.(qucanghua,kay)
(15:14:05) liutao: 4.open discussion
(15:14:12) liutao: .
(15:14:14) liutao: 1.What about the status of our new project "Modularization"(kay)
(15:14:15) liutao: .
(15:14:40) kr: you may have seen the issue I wrote, it is assigned to Louis ...
(15:15:02) liutao: kr:yes,but seems no answer?
(15:15:10) kr: ... I did not get any feedback from Louis yet, going to send him a reminder soon
(15:15:32) xiuzhi: he is too busy, maybe
(15:15:32) liutao: ok
(15:15:38) kr: ...yes, I think his travelling
(15:15:48) liutao: :)
(15:15:49) liutao: .
(15:15:51) liutao: 2.Web Start test "hello world"&"build helper"(liutao,kay)
(15:15:51) liutao: .
(15:16:30) kr: I took a look at mock ups, quite pretty :)
(15:16:34) liutao: Kay:have you test it?I uploaded two projects into wiki page.
(15:16:40) liutao: OK
(15:17:02) kr: I tested it, looks good! Though I was not able to start it as WebStart
(15:18:37) kr: ... I think it is important to say, that this is exactly the way to go :)
(15:18:58) liutao: you mean the second one?I don't know why I also was not able to start it as WebStart.but "hello world"project was able to started as webstart.
(15:19:27) kr: I am going to try it as WebStart today again
(15:19:41) kr: basically everything seems to be there
(15:19:59) liutao: kr:Thank you.
(15:20:32) xiuzhi: liutao: please upload your souce to kay if you don't know the reson.
(15:21:33) liutao: xiuzhi:I already uploaded it:)
(15:22:12) xiuzhi: liutao: that's good
(15:23:57) kr: so, seems we are making progress :)
(15:24:03) liutao: kr:You just said that this is exactly the way to go,do you think we should start to split code simultaneous?
(15:25:06) kr: liutao: if have something in mind, which you could easily add and separate e.g. with configure, just go ahead
(15:25:48) liutao: OK,I see.
(15:25:58) liutao: Anything else in this item?
(15:26:17) kr: wrt to feature separation?
(15:29:00) liutao: kr:Yes, I think feature separation is important and should be started at beginning.but I have no good ideas about this.
(15:29:36) kr: ... we should start with simple ones!
(15:29:52) kr: liutao: anything simple coming to your mind?
(15:29:55) liutao: kr:+1
(15:30:50) is_: perhaps something, that already has a configure switch
(15:31:31) is_: And this switch can be set in the build helper GUI
(15:31:37) xiuzhi: starting from configure switch is good start point
(15:31:37) kr: if it already has a configure switch, than it is already "separated", isn't it?
(15:32:04) is_: Yes, but than we can use the GUI
(15:32:12) kr: ... and yes, we want to support the configure switches in the build helper
(15:33:22) liutao: kr:I think separate a feature like "table" in Writer.or other features that can easily separate.
(15:33:50) is_: liutao: what kind of modularization you prefer at the beginning? In the source code are just in the creation
of the installation sets?
(15:34:15) xiuzhi: and then, we need continue to create more switches by split the features.
(15:34:50) liutao: is_:in the source code.
(15:35:07) kr: liutao: writer tables are IMHO not easily separatable
(15:35:30) liutao: kr:I just take a example :)
(15:36:01) kr: liutao: OK :)
(15:36:52) kr: is_: to make a feature "configurable", we need both, separation in the source and separation in inst sets
(15:37:21) liutao: yes
(15:37:50) is_: kr: is this always true? There might be feature changes inside a library, that do not require changes in installation sets.
(15:38:07) kr: is_: ???
(15:38:42) kr: is_: I see, you likely are talking about just disabling stuff, arn't you?
(15:39:07) is_: kr: yes, disabling or enabling via switch
(15:40:01) kr: is_: mmmhhh ... let me think ... that would work, indeed. Though I though more along the lines of separating on the files level
(15:40:22) kr: 2. though == thought
(15:40:32) is_: kr: what I mean with changes in installation sets, means changes in scp. And scp always means changes in file level.
(15:41:11) is_: kr: and you are right. File level separation is the better solution.
(15:42:15) is_: liutao: You already have looked into the switches in scp2 project and how they influence the installation sets?
(15:42:19) kr: is_: ... at least, if we want to provide the separated features later on may be e.g. as add-ons / extensions
(15:43:24) liutao: is_:yes,but I am not familiar with it,_ch_ is familiar with it.
(15:43:45) is_: kr: ah, extensions are a very strong type of separation
(15:44:11) kr: let's make a plan ...
(15:44:22) kr: 1. continue on build helper to ...
(15:44:33) xiuzhi: yes. we should separate the features to extension at the first step, IMHO
(15:44:42) kr: 1.1 support checkout of sources etc.
(15:44:48) _ch_: is_: yes, we can change the installsets with modifying the scp files.
(15:45:02) kr: 1.2 add support for the "known" configure switches
(15:45:22) is_: _ch_: I think, this is a good and easy starting point for separations
(15:45:43) kr: 2. Separate features as appropriate (e.g. the headless thing)
(15:46:07) kr: 3. May provide the separated features e.g. as extensions
(15:46:34) kr: we may want to work on 1. and 2. simultaneously
(15:46:42) liutao: wonderfull plan:)
(15:46:54) kr: thanks :)
(15:47:22) _ch_: is_: it is easier to separate the files into features, yes.
(15:48:52) is_: _ch_: and in scp2 you can use configure switches, that can be set in the build helper.
(15:49:44) is_: kr: Really good plan. Starting with point 3 after 1 and 2 are finished?
(15:49:50) kr: liutao: regarding sources etc., do we want to go with SVN, or do we want directly use mercurial?
(15:50:22) liutao: mercurial?
(15:50:27) liutao: what is that mean?
(15:50:39) kr: is_: Not necessarily after 2, but surely after 1. Points 2. und 3. may be worked on simultaneously as well
(15:51:01) is_: kr: Yes, sounds good
(15:51:08) kr: liutao: mercurial likely becomes OOo new source code repository based on
(15:51:23) _ch_: is_: yes. :)
(15:51:41) kr: mercurial: http://www.selenic.com/mercurial/wiki/
(15:52:48) kr: heiners blog: http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS/entry/openoffice_org_mercurial_pilot_to
(15:56:06) liutao: I prefer go with SVN
(15:56:12) liutao: xiuzhi:?
(15:56:55) xiuzhi: liutao: it is decided by OOo Concil. SVN is gone
(15:58:10) liutao: xiuzhi:you mean we should directly use mercurial?
(15:58:49) is_: liutao: the creation of the build helper will probably take more time, that svn will still live
(15:58:56) xiuzhi: liutao: we can use SVN now. I am afraid we will transplate to mercurial soon, at the end of this year maybe.
(16:00:06) liutao: OK,I see... we can use mercurial.
(16:03:38) xiuzhi: next item?
(16:03:54) liutao: 3."Build Helper" Spec.(qucanghua,kay)
(16:03:55) liutao: .
(16:05:03) kr: looks quite fine for me :)
(16:05:59) _ch_: kr: thank you. :0
(16:05:59) _ch_: :)
(16:06:41) kr: ... looking forward to seeing all this in action :)
(16:07:39) liutao: I mean the detail of the Spec.If the build helper will be developed by a developer,he should know what to do.
(16:08:27) kr: to me seems that you already have a good understanding of it, what's missing?
(16:08:32) liutao: _ch_ just draw a UI interface.
(16:09:38) _ch_: kr: I thought the UI should like what I have designed.
(16:10:26) _ch_: kr: and acts like the screen-shot displays...
(16:10:31) liutao: kr:OK,we will write a Spec. to describe the build helper not just pictures. Then try to implement it.
(16:12:20) kr: sounds good to me. Just remember to keep it simple. Currently this is from developers for developers
(16:13:09) liutao: kr:yes
(16:13:32) liutao: xiuzhi: do you have any ideas?
(16:14:11) xiuzhi: liutao: no more. you have done a good job
(16:14:26) liutao: .
(16:14:28) liutao: 4.open discussion
(16:14:29) liutao: .
(16:14:52) kr: xiuzhi: how was your presentation? ARM, right?
(16:15:54) xiuzhi: kr: I shew my effort on porting OOo to ARM and some improvements.
(16:16:25) kr: xiuzhi: did you see my last blog posting? There is basically all in there for doing a cross build
(16:16:27) xiuzhi: kr: the netbook based ARM is comming
(16:17:23) xiuzhi: kr: I saw. I asked someone to try to build OOo3.2 on arm on Qemu
(16:17:51) kr: xiuzhi: did it work ?
(16:18:20) xiuzhi: kr: it just start . not finish .maybe next week
(16:18:22) liutao: I forget to ask you. when should our next meeting be hold?
(16:19:03) kr: I would think, that our next meeting is next week tuesday
(16:19:20) liutao: OK
(16:20:41) xiuzhi: kr: Did you run your version on real ARM board?
(16:21:20) kr: xiuzhi: ... don't have any
(16:21:41) xiuzhi: kr: OK. I will try after I finish it
(16:22:24) kr: xiuzhi: I am quite interested to hear if it runs at all
(16:22:52) xiuzhi: is_: do you have any plan need _ch_ help? she has experience on the scp2 module
(16:23:36) is_: xiuzhi: I think that scp2 is the central point for the modularization and
(16:24:00) is_: a good understanding is absolutely necessary for this project. Therefore
(16:24:30) is_: you should make tests, look for the scripts (setup.inf/setup.ins) that are created and look intov
(16:24:53) is_: the explanation at installation.openoffice.org
(16:25:41) is_: _ch_: Did you already read the scp2 documentation?
(16:26:00) _ch_: is_: yes, I have work on it for a while
(16:26:03) _ch_: :)
(16:26:37) is_: _ch_: that is very good :)
(16:27:28) _ch_: is_: it is really great.
(16:27:43) _ch_: I mean the scp2 project .:)
(16:28:38) is_: _ch_: Nice to hear that :) And making it switchable with the build helper will improve it
(16:29:41) kr: sorry for mentioning that ... we are already somewhat over time, what about postponing further discussions to Tuesday?
(16:30:06) _ch_: is_: I will try.
(16:30:09) xiuzhi: ok. see you next Tuesday
(16:30:34) kr: ... bye
(16:30:39) is_: Good bye
(16:30:51) _ch_: see you all then. :)
(16:31:14) liutao: Bye
