Developer Meeting 06/01/2008 16:00pm UTC

Attendees: clsk, J_K9, tstone2077

Note: All timestamps in UTC+1 (Central European Time).


Jan 06 16:59:50 <J_K9> hello clsk, tstone2077 :)

Jan 06 16:59:59 <tstone2077> hello

Jan 06 17:00:13 <clsk> jhey

Jan 06 17:00:18 <J_K9> Happy New Year btw!

Jan 06 17:00:27 <clsk> yea Happy new year

Jan 06 17:00:47 <tstone2077> happy new year!

Jan 06 17:01:04 <J_K9> did anyone receive my email about possibly dropping the sync system for 0.1 release? it hasn't shown up in the archive

Jan 06 17:01:18 <tstone2077> yeah… I got it

Jan 06 17:01:26 <clsk> yea

Jan 06 17:01:31 <clsk> email take a while to show up in the archive

Jan 06 17:01:31 <J_K9> oh… really? all 3?..

Jan 06 17:01:44 <clsk> emails

Jan 06 17:01:46 <clsk> hm I think two

Jan 06 17:02:06 <J_K9> I thought it was a bit odd though because I sent the meeting one after that and the entire thread is in the archive

Jan 06 17:02:19 <clsk> hm weird

Jan 06 17:02:24 <J_K9> yeah

Jan 06 17:02:31 <clsk> I know emails do take a while to show up on the archive

Jan 06 17:02:56 <J_K9> that's true. maybe it'll show up in a few hours or so

Jan 06 17:03:15 <J_K9> is anyone else joining us?

Jan 06 17:03:24 <clsk> I don't think so

Jan 06 17:03:29 <clsk> no one else responded

Jan 06 17:03:37 <J_K9> in that case, we should begin :)

Jan 06 17:04:09 <J_K9> we can either talk about current work first or our targets for the 0.1 release

Jan 06 17:04:35 <clsk> I suppose we could talk about current work first

Jan 06 17:04:41 <clsk> then stuff for the future

Jan 06 17:04:46 <J_K9> ok

Jan 06 17:05:07 <J_K9> Alan, you've done a great job with the communication side of the server

Jan 06 17:05:12 <clsk> tstone2077 you're still there?

Jan 06 17:05:17 <tstone2077> yeah, i'm here

Jan 06 17:06:05 <J_K9> Thurston, how is the GUI coming along? I've looked through your code, but I haven't been able to compile it yet (wxWidgets problems on my end which I'm trying to solve)

Jan 06 17:06:33 <J_K9> have either of you come across any major problems?

Jan 06 17:07:07 <tstone2077> it's going… I'm using wxAUI demo as a sort of jumping off point. So the code is not the cleanest, but it's able to compile both in windows and linux

Jan 06 17:07:10 <clsk> well I've stopped working on the network code

Jan 06 17:07:18 <clsk> Been too busy with school and work lately.

Jan 06 17:07:53 <clsk> can we delete daryl's code from the repository if we're not going to use it anymore?

Jan 06 17:07:58 <J_K9> tstone2077, that's great. how much of the layout have you completed (even though the elements may not actually do anything yet)?

Jan 06 17:08:04 <J_K9> clsk - yes

Jan 06 17:08:17 <tstone2077> I'm fine with that (deleting Daryls code)

Jan 06 17:08:29 <clsk> I mean I don't know if we are. tstone2077 is the one working on that area

Jan 06 17:08:29 <tstone2077> As far as the layout, I had some questions

Jan 06 17:08:41 <J_K9> ok

Jan 06 17:09:09 <tstone2077> but I did the navigator and the Contacts… i have yet to make a better chat GUI

Jan 06 17:09:25 <tstone2077> functionality for all of this is still nil.

Jan 06 17:09:37 <J_K9> that's expected :)

Jan 06 17:10:25 <tstone2077> the screenshot has 'configure server' in the layout

Jan 06 17:10:25 <clsk> I have one more question

Jan 06 17:10:44 <tstone2077> do we want to keep that or will that be a setting (or preference or options… whatever)

Jan 06 17:10:59 <clsk> yes

Jan 06 17:11:10 <J_K9> I think it makes it much easier to access the management interface

Jan 06 17:11:16 <tstone2077> ok

Jan 06 17:11:18 <J_K9> but it may not be used too often?

Jan 06 17:11:21 <clsk> that'll be for server admins only

Jan 06 17:11:41 <tstone2077> ahhh… so it'll be part of the server GUI, not the client GUI

Jan 06 17:11:43 <tstone2077> ?

Jan 06 17:11:50 <J_K9> no

Jan 06 17:11:57 <clsk> is there a reason why all the code is in one file instead of dispersed across different files?

Jan 06 17:12:02 <J_K9> it'll be part of the client GUI, but it has two roles:

Jan 06 17:12:04 <clsk> well

Jan 06 17:12:11 <clsk> there won't be a server GUI really

Jan 06 17:12:18 <clsk> I don't think we need one

Jan 06 17:12:23 <J_K9> 1) it allows users to manage the Mira server they connect to

Jan 06 17:12:35 <J_K9> 2) it allows server administrators to access the server control panels

Jan 06 17:12:53 <J_K9> so it really depends… some users may use it a lot, others may use it far less

Jan 06 17:13:01 <tstone2077> ok… i was thinking there'd be seperate GUIs… we should problaby remove the gui directory from the server source tree, then

Jan 06 17:13:06 <J_K9> clsk - I agree.

Jan 06 17:13:18 <clsk> yea

Jan 06 17:13:21 <J_K9> ah, ok

Jan 06 17:13:40 <J_K9> tstone2077 - do you understand now?

Jan 06 17:13:48 <tstone2077> yeah, that makes sense

Jan 06 17:14:07 <J_K9> great. :) is there anything else you're unclear about?

Jan 06 17:14:44 <tstone2077> thanks for the clarification… could we have a screenshot or description for what the 'configure server' will contain?

Jan 06 17:14:54 <J_K9> http://miragroupware.org/uploads/ui-mockups/servers.png

Jan 06 17:14:58 <J_K9> :)

Jan 06 17:15:40 <tstone2077> oh… is that server administration stuff?

Jan 06 17:15:59 <clsk> hmm

Jan 06 17:16:22 <clsk> tstone2077 I don't think we really know all that much about the implementation yet.

Jan 06 17:16:26 <J_K9> well, it depends what privileges the user has on the server - they can configure servers they access *and* access the server's control panel

Jan 06 17:16:35 <tstone2077> ok

Jan 06 17:16:56 <J_K9> i'll just expand a little on that

Jan 06 17:17:21 <J_K9> say a user wants to access a Workplace on the marketing server and another Workplace on the human resources server

Jan 06 17:17:43 <clsk> perhaps you should focus more on working on the base of the GUI… more like a framework approach.

Jan 06 17:17:43 <J_K9> the user is also the leader of the marketing team, and so is an admin of the marketing server

Jan 06 17:17:53 <J_K9> his screen would look that that mockup :)

Jan 06 17:17:58 <tstone2077> clsk… to answer your question, it's all in one file because that's how wxAUI implemented it origionally… I tried separating it out, but my limited makefile knowledge caused problems… i figured it was best to compile and move forward. any assistance you could give on the makefiles, would be appreciated

Jan 06 17:18:27 <tstone2077> ok, thanks

Jan 06 17:18:35 <clsk> hm I know some stuff about makefiles, but not necessarily an expert

Jan 06 17:18:53 <clsk> I haven't really read through your code because it's kinda hard to read such a big file.

Jan 06 17:19:08 <clsk> give me a second to read your makefile

Jan 06 17:19:20 <clsk> do you use the makefile for windows and linux?

Jan 06 17:19:45 <tstone2077> i use both. Makefile for linux and Makefile.mingw for windows

Jan 06 17:20:01 <clsk> ok

Jan 06 17:20:11 <clsk> I'm not sure for windows. But I should be able to point you in the right direction for linux

Jan 06 17:20:34 <tstone2077> very cool… thank you.

Jan 06 17:21:43 <J_K9> perhaps David could help you with the windows one? he works in a windows environment, I believe

Jan 06 17:22:00 <clsk> what IDE do you use in windows tstone2077?

Jan 06 17:22:20 <tstone2077> I use codeblocks to code in, then the makefiles to compile

Jan 06 17:22:38 <clsk> cool I use codeblocks too

Jan 06 17:22:58 <clsk> would you mind sending your workspace file?

Jan 06 17:23:05 <clsk> actually nevermind

Jan 06 17:23:32 <tstone2077> yeah, there's not much to it since it's not setup to compile.

Jan 06 17:23:55 <clsk> oh crap you used bakefile to generate your makefile

Jan 06 17:24:23 <tstone2077> well… again, i just copied the wxAUI demo from wxWidgets and started modifying things

Jan 06 17:24:34 <clsk> hm I could write a whole build suite with ./configure and all that

Jan 06 17:24:44 <tstone2077> that'd be perfect

Jan 06 17:24:57 <clsk> but I'd have to get my xorg to work again since it crashed last night and I haven't been able to get it to work

Jan 06 17:25:04 <clsk> do you use windows or linux more?

Jan 06 17:25:31 <tstone2077> windows… my vmware makes it tougher to code in linux… but after ever commit, I check the compilation in both

Jan 06 17:26:18 <clsk> good that's better

Jan 06 17:26:29 <clsk> makefile.mingw seems pretty easy

Jan 06 17:26:42 <clsk> go to line 30

Jan 06 17:27:11 <clsk> and see how in line 31 there's a miraclient.o

Jan 06 17:27:15 <clsk> you should be able to add more files

Jan 06 17:27:25 <clsk> like so:

Jan 06 17:27:26 <tstone2077> well… the problem i was seeing was in directories

Jan 06 17:27:57 <tstone2077> i wanted to create a subdirectory called client controls, and keep ContactTreeCtrl.cpp/h NavTreeCtrl.cpp/h

Jan 06 17:28:10 <clsk> CLIENT_OBJECTS = \

Jan 06 17:28:12 <clsk> miraclient.o \

Jan 06 17:28:12 <clsk> anotherfile.o

Jan 06 17:28:21 <clsk> oh

Jan 06 17:28:31 <tstone2077> when I tried to compile in the subdirectory, things got hairy

Jan 06 17:28:36 <clsk> for that pretty much you do make -C directory/

Jan 06 17:29:01 <tstone2077> I guess for now I'll separate them out in the top directory… that'll make it easier

Jan 06 17:29:07 <clsk> I'll mess with it tonight or tomorrow.

Jan 06 17:29:18 <clsk> I should be able to get it working

Jan 06 17:29:24 <J_K9> at the very least, it'll make it more readable :)

Jan 06 17:29:31 <clsk> I don't think I have mingw Makefile though

Jan 06 17:29:37 <clsk> yea

Jan 06 17:29:44 <clsk> right now it's kinda hard to read through the code

Jan 06 17:30:10 <tstone2077> no worries… i'll clean that up

Jan 06 17:30:17 <J_K9> clsk, you said earlier that you had a question?

Jan 06 17:31:07 <clsk> that was it

Jan 06 17:31:14 <clsk> hm I'm trying to think the best way to do it.

Jan 06 17:31:40 <J_K9> oh, you mean splitting up the file?

Jan 06 17:32:34 <clsk> yuss

Jan 06 17:32:57 <J_K9> great! are there any more questions/nasty problems we should discuss?

Jan 06 17:33:12 <clsk> hmm

Jan 06 17:33:12 <clsk> not really

Jan 06 17:33:29 <tstone2077> i don't have anything at the moment

Jan 06 17:33:49 <J_K9> ok, good. let's move on to our targets for the 0.1 release of the Client, and then the Server

Jan 06 17:34:26 <J_K9> first, what do you think of not implementing a sync system for the 0.1 release?

Jan 06 17:34:46 <clsk> sounds like a good idea

Jan 06 17:34:49 <tstone2077> i think that's a good idea.

Jan 06 17:35:17 <clsk> just make it be like a simple VCS

Jan 06 17:35:26 <J_K9> so do I. as long as we implement the storage system and not forget that we'll later have to adapt it for synchronisation, it should allow us to get 0.1 out much faster

Jan 06 17:35:29 <J_K9> exactly

Jan 06 17:35:32 <J_K9> a local one :)

Jan 06 17:35:35 <clsk> what date are we shooting for?

Jan 06 17:35:54 <clsk> local?

Jan 06 17:36:08 <clsk> what do you mean by local?

Jan 06 17:36:13 <J_K9> 'local' in the sense that it doesn't share the data with any other computers

Jan 06 17:36:13 <tstone2077> local VCS

Jan 06 17:36:21 <J_K9> as there's no sync system

Jan 06 17:36:27 <J_K9> hmm… Shall we say, 20th May?

Jan 06 17:37:16 <J_K9> Bare in mind that the outsourcer will begin working with us full-time either tomorrow or sometime during the coming week

Jan 06 17:37:31 <J_K9> so that will definitely speed up the process

Jan 06 17:37:32 <tstone2077> what piece is the outsourcer working on?

Jan 06 17:37:54 <J_K9> they will begin by incorporating xdelta into Mira and building a wrapper around it

Jan 06 17:38:12 <tstone2077> ahhh… very nice

Jan 06 17:38:24 <clsk> hm

Jan 06 17:38:26 <J_K9> although… should we focus on building a version control-free storage system first, before implementing the version control system?

Jan 06 17:38:38 <clsk> J_K9 so files are only stored locally in the machine?

Jan 06 17:38:58 <clsk> yea, that's more usable

Jan 06 17:39:09 <J_K9> yes. I know it defeats the point of the platform, but it'll be a step towards that

Jan 06 17:39:20 <clsk> well with the outsourcer working on it, I think we should be able to get it working by then

Jan 06 17:39:24 <J_K9> we'll make client-server communication and data sync for the 0.2 release, I think

Jan 06 17:39:28 <J_K9> yes

Jan 06 17:39:47 <clsk> client-server communication should be done in 0.1

Jan 06 17:39:55 <clsk> that's something that we should really accomplish right now

Jan 06 17:39:57 <J_K9> so what should the outsourcer tackle first? a simple, no version control storage system?

Jan 06 17:40:03 <clsk> that's the next thing I plan on working.

Jan 06 17:40:04 <J_K9> hm.. ok

Jan 06 17:40:15 <clsk> well first they should tackle what you jus said

Jan 06 17:40:16 <J_K9> by 'communication' do you mean data sync too?

Jan 06 17:40:36 <clsk> integrate xdelta and produce an API for us.

Jan 06 17:40:36 <clsk> no

Jan 06 17:40:36 <clsk> I mean any kind of communication

Jan 06 17:40:49 <J_K9> ah, right

Jan 06 17:41:02 <clsk> just get the client and server talking

Jan 06 17:41:04 <J_K9> yes, that's the plan - we should have client-server communication working for 0.1

Jan 06 17:41:16 <J_K9> but not data synchronisation

Jan 06 17:41:55 <J_K9> i.e. authentication, user and Workplace details transfer, etc should all be working for 0.1

Jan 06 17:42:05 <J_K9> for a lot of that you have already implemented in the Server

Jan 06 17:43:08 <clsk> what I plan on working on probably starting tomorrow and through my journey back to the states

Jan 06 17:43:08 <clsk> I'll be stuck in planes for long hours so..

Jan 06 17:43:08 <clsk> is getting and the server and client to talk

Jan 06 17:43:08 <clsk> and maybe use the GUI to do that (using tstone2077's work)

Jan 06 17:43:08 <clsk> yuss

Jan 06 17:43:09 <clsk> just need to do the client side

Jan 06 17:43:25 <J_K9> shouldn't the outsourcer work on a non-version controlled storage system first though? a way of storing Workplace data without version control? before implementing xdelta, which is used in the version controlled system

Jan 06 17:43:39 <J_K9> that's awesome

Jan 06 17:43:58 <clsk> nah

Jan 06 17:44:01 <clsk> that's something fairly simple.

Jan 06 17:44:04 <J_K9> ok

Jan 06 17:44:12 <J_K9> how about after that?

Jan 06 17:44:19 <clsk> I think we should use them for the more complex stuff

Jan 06 17:44:28 <J_K9> definitely

Jan 06 17:44:31 <J_K9> :)

Jan 06 17:44:41 <clsk> but I mean

Jan 06 17:44:48 <clsk> it's you paying them so, it's your call

Jan 06 17:45:24 <J_K9> not at all - it's our call. we need to decide as a team. plus, you're the ones who understand the code - you know what's complicated and what isn't :)

Jan 06 17:46:45 <J_K9> how about the database layer? should they work on that next?

Jan 06 17:46:57 <clsk> how many of them are there?

Jan 06 17:47:05 <clsk> one or wo?

Jan 06 17:47:05 <clsk> two*

Jan 06 17:47:13 <clsk> I'd say maybe the directory system

Jan 06 17:47:20 <clsk> that's something I lack experience on

Jan 06 17:47:25 <J_K9> just one. i'm saying 'they' because i'm not sure if it's a male or female dev, heh

Jan 06 17:47:30 <J_K9> ok

Jan 06 17:47:40 <clsk> the whole design is something I haven't been able to figure out.

Jan 06 17:47:44 <clsk> It's very complex

Jan 06 17:47:46 <J_K9> we're going to need to flesh that out in more detail then

Jan 06 17:48:00 <clsk> yea

Jan 06 17:48:07 <clsk> it's more complex than I thought it would be.

Jan 06 17:48:10 <J_K9> I think i've written its blueprint, but we'll need to break it down into pieces and explain those as well

Jan 06 17:49:10 <J_K9> oh, yup, here we go: http://miragroupware.org/wiki/doku.php/development/blueprints/layers/directory

Jan 06 17:49:14 <J_K9> that's far too simple :)

Jan 06 17:49:57 <J_K9> I thought you'd already done a lot of work on the directory layer though?

Jan 06 17:50:53 <clsk> nah. not really

Jan 06 17:52:00 <J_K9> ok

Jan 06 17:52:46 <clsk> I think what we need to focus on the most is the framework

Jan 06 17:53:07 <J_K9> bringing all of these piece together?

Jan 06 17:53:24 <clsk> like… providing functionalities to other modules so that modules can better communicate with eachother

Jan 06 17:53:38 <J_K9> yes

Jan 06 17:54:00 <clsk> like for example… the network code providing the other modules the ability to send messages across the network

Jan 06 17:54:15 <clsk> the GUI module providing functionalities to create a message box,

Jan 06 17:54:25 <clsk> things like that

Jan 06 17:54:29 <J_K9> but that's something that needs to be done when someone's working on a module - looking at which other layers need to access it, how they need to access it, what kind of data should be returned, etc

Jan 06 17:54:34 <J_K9> yes

Jan 06 17:55:42 <J_K9> but a lot of that 'framework' unification can only be accomplished - at least on the client side - when the GUI is up, because that's what really dictates what button calls which function and which layers are accessed as a result

Jan 06 17:55:45 <clsk> right

Jan 06 17:55:55 <clsk> nah not really

Jan 06 17:56:19 <J_K9> how not?

Jan 06 17:56:23 <clsk> nah the GUI module should wrap stuff like that.

Jan 06 17:56:45 <clsk> whenever possible of course.

Jan 06 17:57:05 <J_K9> ok

Jan 06 17:57:51 <J_K9> something that should help this is the blueprint for each layer - as long as the requirements of that layer are clearly defined (including what other layers need to access it and how), it shouldn't be a problem

Jan 06 17:58:47 <clsk> yea

Jan 06 17:58:48 <J_K9> btw, shall messaging be implemented in 0.1? how far has that been implemented in the comms code, or how long would it take to do so?

Jan 06 17:59:09 <clsk> yea that will be something easy to implement

Jan 06 17:59:12 <J_K9> it's not much of a requirement for the first release, but it would show that the client-server-client communication is working

Jan 06 17:59:14 <J_K9> excellent

Jan 06 17:59:39 <J_K9> we don't need to have too complex a messaging centre for it at first, so don't worry about that tstone2077

Jan 06 18:00:12 <clsk> hm what?

Jan 06 18:00:12 <tstone2077> ahh… ok, so you're talking more about the 'inbox' type messaging?

Jan 06 18:00:14 <clsk> he said something?

Jan 06 18:00:17 <J_K9> yes

Jan 06 18:00:18 <J_K9> lol

Jan 06 18:00:26 <clsk> I'm afraid I'm not reading his messages

Jan 06 18:00:27 <tstone2077> as opposed to the chat system

Jan 06 18:00:30 <J_K9> yes

Jan 06 18:00:38 <tstone2077> ok

Jan 06 18:00:50 <J_K9> clsk - have you received the last two?

Jan 06 18:00:57 <J_K9> three

Jan 06 18:00:57 <clsk> yea last two I did

Jan 06 18:00:59 <J_K9> ok

Jan 06 18:01:05 <clsk> last three

Jan 06 18:01:11 <clsk> what did he say before that?

Jan 06 18:01:19 <tstone2077> i didn't say anything before that

Jan 06 18:01:26 <J_K9> that's it :)

Jan 06 18:01:56 <J_K9> it'll probably end up being quite a lot of GUI work, but just enough to send a message and a very plain inbox/read message will be fine

Jan 06 18:02:30 <J_K9> if it's too much work, then maybe we should leave the front-end until a later release (but the back-end functionality should still be implemented)

Jan 06 18:02:52 <clsk> oh ok

Jan 06 18:02:52 <clsk> heh

Jan 06 18:02:52 <clsk> actually the chat system should be easier to implement.

Jan 06 18:02:52 <clsk> more like Instant messaging

Jan 06 18:02:52 <clsk> yea just a simple window to send/recieve messages.

Jan 06 18:02:53 <clsk> should be able to open one by double-clicking on a user

Jan 06 18:03:31 <J_K9> so should we implement the chat system or the private/personal message (PM) system for 0.1?

Jan 06 18:03:58 <J_K9> the chat system is much easier - personally, I think we should implement that in 0.1 and leave the message system for 0.2/0.3

Jan 06 18:04:07 <clsk> well

Jan 06 18:04:15 <clsk> that's the thing

Jan 06 18:04:46 <clsk> most people will probably want a full email type of thing

Jan 06 18:04:46 <clsk> where you can use an already-implemented mail server

Jan 06 18:04:46 <clsk> and use mira as a front-end

Jan 06 18:05:36 <J_K9> well, that's something we should think of much further down the road IMHO - integrating an email client into Mira will be difficult

Jan 06 18:05:50 <clsk> yea

Jan 06 18:05:53 <clsk> I agree

Jan 06 18:05:54 <J_K9> and that doesn't make it such a 'confined' system (which it is, in a good way)

Jan 06 18:06:36 <clsk> so a simple instant messaging system

Jan 06 18:06:42 <tstone2077> I would see that as a utility.

Jan 06 18:06:46 <clsk> also offline messages will probably be able to be sent

Jan 06 18:06:47 <tstone2077> (the email client)

Jan 06 18:06:52 <clsk> oh yea

Jan 06 18:06:57 <clsk> definitively that would be a utility

Jan 06 18:07:08 <J_K9> hmm… well, then it would be tied to a Workplace

Jan 06 18:07:19 <J_K9> this is obviously something we'll need to debate at a later date :D

Jan 06 18:07:20 <clsk> hmm well

Jan 06 18:07:27 <tstone2077> oh, true

Jan 06 18:07:27 <clsk> it shouldn't.

Jan 06 18:07:29 <J_K9> because I can't see us agreeing on that soon, hehe

Jan 06 18:07:43 <clsk> maybe utilities shouldn't necessarily be part of a workplace

Jan 06 18:08:04 <tstone2077> maybe there can be utilities for workplaces and plugins for mira client

Jan 06 18:08:12 <J_K9> are you comfortable implementing the front-end for 0.1, tstone2077?

Jan 06 18:08:18 <J_K9> perhaps

Jan 06 18:08:31 <J_K9> that is not a bad idea

Jan 06 18:08:43 <tstone2077> the front end of the inbox messaging system? the IM system? the chat system? or all?

Jan 06 18:08:49 <J_K9> sorry - i meant the front-end for the chat/IM system

Jan 06 18:08:59 <tstone2077> yeah, that's fine

Jan 06 18:09:12 <J_K9> that'll be a real-time chat system, so I don't think messages will be cached

Jan 06 18:09:42 <J_K9> clsk - the 'offline messages' are private messages, which uses the message centre. i think that's a lot of work for our target release date

Jan 06 18:11:36 <clsk> hm

Jan 06 18:11:53 <clsk> private messages is what we're targeting

Jan 06 18:12:14 <clsk> we can't do workplace chat sessions since.. well… there aren't workplaces yet.

Jan 06 18:12:30 <J_K9> ah

Jan 06 18:12:39 <J_K9> right

Jan 06 18:12:40 <clsk> what I'm thinking is the thing would work like other IM programs

Jan 06 18:12:43 <clsk> lke msn

Jan 06 18:12:57 <clsk> where you talk to one user at a time

Jan 06 18:13:18 <clsk> and you can send messages while they're offline and they're sent to the user

Jan 06 18:13:23 <J_K9> ok

Jan 06 18:13:30 <J_K9> that's definitely the private message system

Jan 06 18:13:39 <clsk> the whole offline messages we might not be able to do just yet though.

Jan 06 18:13:55 <clsk> the chat system should be more like a utility

Jan 06 18:14:29 <clsk> although with the system I'm talking about if you look at the protocol document a person should be able to send a message to all members of a workplace

Jan 06 18:14:49 <J_K9> yes, it's possible to message more than one person in a workplace

Jan 06 18:15:31 <clsk> ok

Jan 06 18:15:49 <J_K9> you are talking about the private message system though… tstone2077 - can you guesstimate how long it would take to implement a working GUI for that?

Jan 06 18:16:20 <clsk> tstone2077: I got mingw Makefile and I'm downloading wxwidgets so I should be able to provide you a makefile tomorrow

Jan 06 18:16:35 <clsk> what's your email so I can send you any progress I make?

Jan 06 18:17:01 <J_K9> it doesn't need to look as good as the one in the mockups (http://miragroupware.org/screenshots.php) lol, but they're something to go by for the layout

Jan 06 18:17:23 <tstone2077> J_K9… a couple weeks… assuming I can devote enough time to it. I don't think the front end will be tough.

Jan 06 18:17:50 <tstone2077> clsk: tstone2077@hotmail.com

Jan 06 18:17:51 <J_K9> really? ah, that is brilliant. I thought it would be more difficult

Jan 06 18:18:34 <tstone2077> J_K9: I may be oversimplifying it, but I think that should be accurate.

Jan 06 18:18:43 <J_K9> ok

Jan 06 18:19:22 <tstone2077> clsk: there is a SETUP.txt in the wxWidgets directory to help setup wxWidgets. I copied it to the alt directory and will have it there for the next commit

Jan 06 18:20:17 <clsk> cool

Jan 06 18:20:17 <clsk> thanks

Jan 06 18:20:17 <clsk> we should probably put that on the wiki

Jan 06 18:20:24 <J_K9> we're going to need the database layer for 0.1 too. have we decided to use soci (http://soci.sourceforge.net/)?

Jan 06 18:20:37 <clsk> hm

Jan 06 18:20:41 <clsk> we haven't

Jan 06 18:20:42 <J_K9> sure - I'll add it to the wiki :)

Jan 06 18:20:46 <clsk> but we could I guess.

Jan 06 18:20:52 <J_K9> ok… pros and cons?

Jan 06 18:20:56 <clsk> I haven't really read much about it so I can't comment

Jan 06 18:21:05 <J_K9> ok

Jan 06 18:21:30 <J_K9> just a question

Jan 06 18:21:57 <J_K9> if the directory layer is configured to use a database for storage (not something it should do for 0.1, but..)

Jan 06 18:22:26 <clsk> hm that probably won't work for me. I don't have MYSYS. I'm planning on installing with the windows installer.

Jan 06 18:22:32 <J_K9> will it access the database via the database layer? will it use the same DB as the utility data stored in the DB?

Jan 06 18:23:01 <clsk> probably not.

Jan 06 18:23:19 <clsk> It will probably be able to use the same database. Just not through the storage utility

Jan 06 18:23:32 <J_K9> ok

Jan 06 18:23:35 <clsk> or DB utility

Jan 06 18:23:40 <clsk> is there a DB utility?

Jan 06 18:23:47 <J_K9> DB layer? yes

Jan 06 18:23:54 <clsk> oh

Jan 06 18:23:56 <clsk> ok

Jan 06 18:24:00 <clsk> hm it might

Jan 06 18:24:01 <J_K9> it should be part of storage though, shouldn't it?

Jan 06 18:24:04 <clsk> I don't know

Jan 06 18:24:11 <clsk> I guess we'll see.

Jan 06 18:24:14 <J_K9> hehe

Jan 06 18:24:30 <clsk> That's how I thought it was

Jan 06 18:24:30 <clsk> if that's the way it is, then probably not

Jan 06 18:24:30 <clsk> if it's a separate utility then probably so

Jan 06 18:24:44 <J_K9> in the email, I think I suggested Notes and Files as the only two Utilities to include in 0.1

Jan 06 18:24:45 <J_K9> ok

Jan 06 18:25:05 <clsk> hm that's another thing

Jan 06 18:25:10 <J_K9> ^ that would allow us to test both the database storage and file storage

Jan 06 18:25:17 <J_K9> yes?

Jan 06 18:25:20 <clsk> oh layer I meant yea

Jan 06 18:25:23 <tstone2077> is there goign to be a utility API in 0.1?

Jan 06 18:25:31 <clsk> that's another thing

Jan 06 18:25:34 <clsk> yea

Jan 06 18:25:38 <J_K9> hm…

Jan 06 18:25:39 <clsk> that's what I was about to say.

Jan 06 18:25:49 <clsk> That's kinda of an issue.

Jan 06 18:26:03 <clsk> I don't know if there's a cross-platform way of doing plugins

Jan 06 18:26:05 <clsk> there should be though

Jan 06 18:26:12 <clsk> Just have to find the best way to do it.

Jan 06 18:26:19 <J_K9> well, I think we should make a Utility API but not implement it fully - sufficiently to include those two Utilities, though? I don't know.. what do you think?

Jan 06 18:26:21 <clsk> if not we can always create our own.

Jan 06 18:26:34 <clsk> yea that sounds good.

Jan 06 18:26:44 <tstone2077> yeah… I think that works

Jan 06 18:26:51 <J_K9> ok

Jan 06 18:27:48 <tstone2077> is there anything more that we would want to include in 0.1? this seems like a good list

Jan 06 18:27:59 <clsk> yea I think that should be it.

Jan 06 18:28:07 <J_K9> the only module we haven't talked about is Internal Communication - is this so that Utilities can talk to other Utilities, e.g. a link in a Note takes you to an event in the Calendar Utility in the same Workplace?

Jan 06 18:28:14 <J_K9> yes, that's a good list for 0.1

Jan 06 18:28:20 <clsk> yuss

Jan 06 18:28:44 <J_K9> we should leave Internal Communication until 0.4/0.5, I think - it's a nice feature, but it's not important for the platform to work

Jan 06 18:28:57 <clsk> right

Jan 06 18:29:35 <J_K9> right, well… I think that's pretty much it! :) unless you have any more questions or ideas?

Jan 06 18:29:43 <tstone2077> I can break out the GUI items into tasks (and subtasks). I think this will help for distributing the work. So far, it seems that there aren't a lot of coding resources to implement our list, but perhaps that's because we don't have the tasks defined.

Jan 06 18:30:01 <J_K9> tstone2077, that would help tremendously

Jan 06 18:30:09 <clsk> I agree

Jan 06 18:30:22 <tstone2077> do we have a task tracker?

Jan 06 18:30:35 <J_K9> hmm… not yet

Jan 06 18:30:36 <clsk> hm not really

Jan 06 18:30:41 <tstone2077> ok… just curious

Jan 06 18:30:41 <J_K9> well, we do have launchpad

Jan 06 18:30:50 <clsk> does sourceforge have that?

Jan 06 18:31:03 <clsk> hm

Jan 06 18:31:05 <J_K9> and a blueprint on there is pretty much a task, which you can define in terms of completion etc

Jan 06 18:31:21 <clsk> I wonder when they're going to finish tortoisebzr

Jan 06 18:31:37 <J_K9> aye

Jan 06 18:31:45 <clsk> nah but a blueprint is something different

Jan 06 18:31:53 <J_K9> that's true

Jan 06 18:32:15 <tstone2077> oh yeah, source forge has a task option

Jan 06 18:32:17 <J_K9> but if you look at blueprints for other projects, they're much smaller and better defined - they are, essentially, tasks

Jan 06 18:32:41 <clsk> hm

Jan 06 18:32:42 <tstone2077> but there are no assignments or statuses

Jan 06 18:32:46 <clsk> yea I can see how that's true max.

Jan 06 18:32:47 <J_K9> there are

Jan 06 18:32:55 <tstone2077> oh…

Jan 06 18:33:22 <J_K9> if you try adding a blueprint, you can then edit it to change its status :) feel free to add a test one and try it out, or edit an existing one

Jan 06 18:33:34 <tstone2077> ahhh… i see

Jan 06 18:33:41 <clsk> he means in sourceforge I think

Jan 06 18:33:47 <J_K9> nope, launchpad :)

Jan 06 18:34:01 <clsk> tstone2077 I mean

Jan 06 18:34:02 <clsk> heh

Jan 06 18:34:09 <J_K9> ah, right! hehe sorry

Jan 06 18:34:34 <tstone2077> oh… i was talking about launchpad… i didn't understand the blueprint tool

Jan 06 18:34:37 <clsk> J_K9 I think you can add a task thing in sourceforge

Jan 06 18:34:45 <clsk> just have to go through the admin page and do it

Jan 06 18:34:47 <J_K9> clsk, I don't think it's very advanced though

Jan 06 18:35:09 <tstone2077> we don't have to have a task tracker… i just figured that'd be easier

Jan 06 18:35:17 <clsk> http://sourceforge.net/pm/?group_id=189495

Jan 06 18:35:22 <tstone2077> we can use wiki or something like that even

Jan 06 18:35:45 <clsk> yea a task tracker would be nice

Jan 06 18:35:50 <J_K9> that's true

Jan 06 18:36:02 <clsk> although we don't really have a lot of people working on the code

Jan 06 18:36:14 <J_K9> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/mira

Jan 06 18:36:18 <clsk> so it's probably not necessary right now

Jan 06 18:36:31 <J_K9> for example, that shows the design status, delivery status, etc

Jan 06 18:36:31 <tstone2077> well… that's one reason that I was thinking it'd make it easier… we can add more coders

Jan 06 18:36:46 <J_K9> you don't have to have a blueprint with it, but that describes the task in more detail

Jan 06 18:37:26 <clsk> we can try that I guess

Jan 06 18:37:57 <J_K9> we should… there are possibly better ones, but I don't want to add another tool because the multiple accounts annoys people, hehe

Jan 06 18:38:29 <J_K9> for example, trac (http://trac.edgewall.org/) is good for task tracking, but blueprints are already included in launchpad

Jan 06 18:38:36 <J_K9> and we've got a bug tracker on there too, etc

Jan 06 18:38:48 <J_K9> it all comes down to how you feel about unification :P

Jan 06 18:39:15 <tstone2077> i agree… the less places, the better

Jan 06 18:39:20 <clsk> yea I like the idea of doing everything in once place

Jan 06 18:39:36 <tstone2077> maybe one mira workplace :D

Jan 06 18:39:44 <J_K9> haha! yes, eventually ;)

Jan 06 18:40:05 <clsk> heh

Jan 06 18:40:05 <J_K9> I can't wait for that day, hehe

Jan 06 18:40:18 <clsk> self-hosting

Jan 06 18:40:22 <clsk> that'd be cool

Jan 06 18:40:31 <J_K9> yup! :)

Jan 06 18:40:54 <clsk> hmm

Jan 06 18:41:04 <clsk> do we have anything else to discuss?

Jan 06 18:41:23 <J_K9> I think I've been using the blueprints tool (on launchpad) in the wrong way - for too large topics. let's start using it for tasks, and define them well

Jan 06 18:41:56 <J_K9> other than that.. no! :) I'll try to sum up the 0.1 targets on the wiki and write an email to the list about what we've discussed

Jan 06 18:42:06 <clsk> I think we can use it for both

Jan 06 18:42:14 <J_K9> ok

Jan 06 18:42:21 <J_K9> then we'll do that :)

Jan 06 18:42:23 <tstone2077> sounds good

Jan 06 18:42:42 <tstone2077> so… once I have some tasks define, I'll add them to the launchpad

Jan 06 18:42:47 <J_K9> great!

Jan 06 18:43:01 <J_K9> I'll try to split some of the larger topics down into tasks too

Jan 06 18:43:02 <clsk> is it possible to make a sub-blueprint?

Jan 06 18:43:02 <clsk> well I have to go call the gf

Jan 06 18:43:06 <clsk> tstone2077 I'll have some good news for you probably tomorrow or the day after that.

Jan 06 18:43:09 <clsk> on the Makefile thing

Jan 06 18:43:11 <tstone2077> i'll send out a mail to see if anyone else wants to pick up some of those tasks

Jan 06 18:43:11 <J_K9> hopefully that'll make it easier for other developers to contribute

Jan 06 18:43:25 <tstone2077> cool, thanks for the help, clsk

Jan 06 18:43:37 <J_K9> clsk - I'm not sure about a sub-blueprint, but you may be able to relate it to another one. test it out :)

Jan 06 18:43:58 <clsk> yea

Jan 06 18:44:04 <clsk> will try later

Jan 06 18:44:14 <clsk> I have to go

Jan 06 18:44:14 <clsk> bye now

Jan 06 18:44:20 <tstone2077> c ya

Jan 06 18:44:22 <J_K9> ok. thanks for joining! :)

Jan 06 18:44:26 <J_K9> bye

Jan 06 18:44:40 <tstone2077> bye

 
development/communication/archives/080106_targets.txt · Last modified: 2007/09/05 19:15 (external edit)
 
Recent changes RSS feed Creative Commons License Donate Powered by PHP Valid XHTML 1.0 Valid CSS Driven by DokuWiki