[ptx] Separate Optimizer/Stitcher Package?

[JD Smith]

On Tue, 2003-12-16 at 10:24, Pablo d'Angelo wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Dec 2003, JD Smith wrote:
> 
> > 
> > The creation of an optimizer and stitcher completely separate from
> > PTOptimizer/PTStitcher is a real achievement, which I think would have
> > great impact outside of the hugin project.  Since these have so many
> > fewer dependencies than hugin, does it make sense to split them off into
> > their own package?  Assuming they are both drop-in replacements (except
> > faster and with source available), I know many users of PanoTools would
> > benefit from their wide availability, e.g. those with a large collection
> > of control script files already in hand.  It would also be good
> 
> Well, the script parser is only able to parse hugin, PTAssembler and PTGui
> project files, at least right now.
> 
> > advertisement for the capabilities hugin, though I suspect the other
> > front-ends would catch on to the speed-up techniques and implement them
> > themselves.  
> 
> Yes, I see the possibilities. Currently the stitcher is integrated into the
> Panorama Data model of hugin, with support for interactive changes and some
> other stuff that was modelled after the panorama tools.
> 
> Otherwise it is definately possible to break them apart. The question is
> whether this should be done now, or after our stitcher has gotten a new
> architecture (Alexandre had some good ideas).

Thanks Pablo.  Can you describe the basic differences between the hugin
and standard PanoTools script formats?  Ideally, we could come up with a
single new format everyone could use, so projects can be migrated easily
from one program to another, or even used with the broken-out
command-line stitcher/optimizer.

JD