26 Apr
2011
26 Apr
'11
11:56 p.m.
Nick, Doru,
I am obviously interested in this ... The current OmniBrowser-based
"remote tools suite" for GemStone is adequate, but not ideal ... the cut
point for the interface between GemStone and Pharo (the client GUI) is
at the update:/changed: layer which can be VERY CHATTY across the wire ...
I am intrigued by the idea of javascript-browser-based tools, but
development tools in the browser will have to be "different" than the
traditional image-based tools, just because the browser itself is
different ...
I would like to understand where the basic cut point for Glamour is and
find out if there is a natural point to "insert the wire" between the
Morphic-window and the server ...
Since GemStone has no native gui, all tools must be remote:)
Dale
On 04/26/2011 02:45 PM, stephane ducasse wrote:
dale
nick should be working on remote tools for his phd and may be gemstone could be a
validation too.
Stef
On Apr 26, 2011, at 11:27 PM, Dale Henrichs wrote:
On 04/26/2011 02:01 PM, Tudor Girba wrote:
Hi,
Glamour should be able to accommodate your requests. Just a note, Glamour is not a user
interface framework, it is a browser framework, and it's goal is to help you browse
and manipulate data.
I have a bit of time this week and I could work on this. I propose to start from a list
of use cases. When I say use cases I do not mean user interface use cases. I would be
interested in the activities that you would like to accomplish.
Cheers,
Doru
What resources does Glamour require? ... For GemStone, OmniBrowser is the only framework
supported ... there is no native Morphic, so because OmniBrowser was architected with a
small intefact between Morphic and the Browser model, I was able to "make it
work" with GemStone as the server and Pharo as the client ...
Sooo that is the main limiting factor in "porting" Glamour to GemStone ...
The use case of the moment is providing support for constructing complex configurations,
including conditional packages ... the works ... I have a concept of how I'd like to
accomplish this, but it has not fully emerged as something that I can completely
articulate ... I haven't drawn any pictures either, so the only picture is in my
brain:)
The short term goal would be to improve the simple interface reachable by the
+Configuration button ... There we have several steps that are performed in a series of
dialog boxes, so just putting the individual operations into a single window with forms
fill out for textual items and drag/drop from a list of packages for the initial
specification ...
This would give us a starting point to work towards the complexity of specifying
something like Moose or Seaside ... where required/included packages are specified and
specs are moved around between conditional sections ... Projects are dropped onto the
version window from a list of projects and then the basic template (name, configuration
name and repository) can be editted expanded ...
Dale