hugin

[Pablo d'Angelo]

Hi Frederic,

On Fri, 18 Apr 2003, Frederic wrote:

> (Sorry, I'm french, and my english is not very good)

Don't worry about that. I could understand everything you wrote :)

> First, thank you very much for you long mail. As I'm very
> interesting with your project, I'm going to tell you what I think.

I appreciate every help I can get, but at the moment I haven't decided
if I'll develop hugin further or if I'll join the ptopengui project. I
posted the other mail to their development list <ptx at email-lists.org>
as well, to see what they think. Probably we should cc our mails to
that list as well. I didn't post this mail there because I didn't know
if you want to post there. Please tell me if I can post your mail and
my reply to that list.

Yes I agree that QT is really nice, but it really is only a tool to
reach my goals. And if the ptopengui guys agree with my ideas, I'll
start working with them. Only if they do not want to use a design
patterns and so on I will continue with hugin.

I do not want to create several projects because of a different GUI
toolkit. I'll wait for the response of the ptopengui guys and decide
then.

> of the project decided to use high level methods to work. So, we started
> to learn UML, Unified Project, Design Patterns, etc... Very interesting.
>
> So, I'm very interested to work on your project, the way you intend. I like
> writing nice and clean code as much as getting the final result (even if
> my code is not always as clean as I want).

I always have the same feeling :)

> I guess you have the Design Pattern book from the 4 guys. I found it in
> french ;o) It is a very good book. I also have the book form Craig Larman,
> 'UML and Design Patterns', which describe how works the Unified Process.
> It is a very good way to work in software engineering. I like very much
> the concept of 'iterations' (we use it for our project).

I've used the Rational Unified Process for a 5 people project at the
university, and I don't think it that it'll fit onto an opensource
project. Way to much organizational stuff (we spend a lot of time on
writing stupid documents, that didn't have any real value). 

As long as the team is only small, an more code based process (some
parts of XP, like automateded tests) fits better. Obviously there will
be iterations where we add new features, and discussions about the
design at the beginning of an iteration. but I don't want to play
project manager and create gnatt charts for them etc.

> Well, so tell me if you want me to help you in developping 'hugin'. I can
> help you to code, or just discuss some points of Design, GUI, and also
> help you to debug (tests).

Sure, help is always welcome. just wait for a few days and we'll see
how things go.

> Last point: as I told you, we use a big software which allow to make UML
> design and generate code (I don't like very much the code), but also
> reverse-engineering. I gave it your code, and made the class diagram. You
> can find it attached. I think it is also possible to generate sequence
> diagrams, but I don't know how; I have to learn that.
>
> Are you using a UML designer, such ArgoUML, or umbrello ? Maybe a good
> solution to discuss concepts...

Oh, I think that together is a nice pice of software, but its unusable
on my laptop with only 128 MB memory. umbrello seems to crash at
startup, but I think that is/was a problem created by with the debian
library chaos when they moved to 3.2.

sofar I haven't used a design tool, because the classes and their
interactions still fitted into my head. UML is definately nice to give
other developers an idea how stuff is supposed to work together.

I think an overview UML diagram and some doxygen (www.doxygen.org)
created documentation the main things we need.

Maybe I'll start drawing ideas in uml as well, when I get umbrello
running.

> Best regards,
>
> PS: I'm using a Debian woody, and I was not able to compile your source :o(
> I think you are using g++-3.x. The 2.95 version does not know the find()
> iterator method.

missed an include, I can compile it with 2.95 now (but obviously not
link, because of the diffrent name mangling of gcc 2.95 and 3.2).


ciao
  Pablo
--
http://wurm.wohnheim.uni-ulm.de/~redman/
Please use PGP