[bt-devel] Backend Proposal

Mon Jun 27 13:17:51 MST 2011

I found the commit that I missmerged:
fec8453a22a82b4348e2b060adb40be83a4b9744
in file btactioncollection.cpp

The "// Write beautiful string lists (since 2.9):" in btactioncollection.cpp 
is the part I have not yet merged. As already said, I'll try to reimplement 
that functionality, probably next week.

Greetings,
Patrick

On Monday, 27. June 2011 22:08:56 Patrick Sebastian Zimmermann wrote:
> I found the bug. Commit is already there.
> I am not satisfied with the solution though. There were more changes in
> master in the affected function. I need to merge those (otherwise the
> merge "reverts" a commit in master). I need to take a look at that again
> (not this week though).
> 
> At least Bibletime runs again.
> 
> Greetings,
> Patrick
> 
> On Sunday, 26. June 2011 17:30:43 Jaak Ristioja wrote:
> > Ok, I tried to compile and run your code after you merged master. It
> > compiles well. I noticed that btconfig.cpp there are two places where
> > deprecated Sword code is used: "list.GetElement" should be replaced with
> > "list.getElement".
> > 
> > You also noted that it crashes when you try to run it, just as you
> > documented in the commit message. This is because of endless recursion
> > 
> > in the following 6 functions:
> >   QDataStream &operator<<(QDataStream &out, const
> > 
> > Search::BtSearchOptionsArea::SearchType &searchType);
> > 
> >   QDataStream &operator>>(QDataStream &in,
> > 
> > Search::BtSearchOptionsArea::SearchType &searchType);
> > 
> >   QDataStream &operator<<(QDataStream &out, const alignmentMode &x);
> >   QDataStream &operator>>(QDataStream &in, alignmentMode &x);
> >   QDataStream &operator<<(QDataStream &out, const
> > 
> > BTModuleTreeItem::Grouping &x);
> > 
> >   QDataStream &operator>>(QDataStream &in, BTModuleTreeItem::Grouping
> >   &x);
> > 
> > I might continue verifying your code in the next two days if I get the
> > time. I hope you can get it to run more-or-less. :)
> > 
> > 
> > Blessings!
> > Jaak
> > 
> > On 23.06.2011 11:17, Patrick Sebastian Zimmermann wrote:
> > > One more file to merge until the first compile.
> > > Rest this evening.
> > > 
> > > Patrick
> > > 
> > > On Wednesday, 22. June 2011 18:17:45 Patrick Sebastian Zimmermann wrote:
> > >> Hi,
> > >> 
> > >> I'll see if I can get this done tomorrow morning. The two other merge
> > >> requests I'll leave for later since they are just bugfixes that can be
> > >> applied at any time later just as well.
> > >> 
> > >> Greetings,
> > >> Patrick
> > >> 
> > >> On Tuesday, 21. June 2011 23:55:32 Jaak Ristioja wrote:
> > >>> On 20.06.2011 21:24, Patrick Sebastian Zimmermann wrote:
> > >>>> I have a pretty much finished rewrite of the config system in a
> > >>>> branch. The changes include a unit testing framework (based on
> > >>>> QTest) and are meant to unify config option and session handling.
> > >>>> The code probably still has some bugs, but I have tested the code
> > >>>> quite a lot and I think I got most of the bugs out already.
> > >>> 
> > >>> I've tried to review your changes several times, but never finished.
> > >>> These are big changes and take a lot of time to review. Last time I
> > >>> tried was months ago, so I don't remember any more and need to start
> > >>> from scratch again. It would help a tiny bit if you could again merge
> > >>> master into your branch and also my merge request.
> > >>> 
> > >>>> I am not sure whether you think this config system refactor is a
> > >>>> good idea. But if you think it should go into master it really
> > >>>> makes sense to merge before starting the frontend/backend refactor.
> > >>> 
> > >>> I believe you've done a serious amount of work. We should definitely
> > >>> work this out before any other major refactoring efforts start. I
> > >>> suspect that this won't be an easy merge, but I'm willing to study
> > >>> your changes and try... when I have time...
> > >>> 
> > >>>> I am currently very short in time, but if it's not much that is
> > >>>> needed to get this into the tree I can at least give it a try.
> > >>> 
> > >>> Same problem with most of us. :|
> > >>> 
> > >>>> ps. There are three smaller bugfix merge requests still hanging in
> > >>>> the queue...
> > >>> 
> > >>> I merged one of them, and commented on the other two because they
> > >>> need a bit of clarification. I don't yet fully understand the
> > >>> problems they fix nor am I sure whether these fixes are indeed
> > >>> correct.
> > >>> 
> > >>>> On Monday, 20. June 2011 00:46:13 Greg Hellings wrote:
> > >>>>> On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 4:54 PM, Gary Holmlund
> > >>>>> <gary.holmlund at gmail.com>
> > >>>> 
> > >>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>> I would be willing to do the structural work of moving files into
> > >>>>>> new directories and changing the backend and rendering into
> > >>>>>> libraries. We would want to get agreement on the details before
> > >>>>>> any work starts. The work should be done so that there is never a
> > >>>>>> commit that does not compile and run. It can be broken down into
> > >>>>>> a series of small steps that accomplish this.
> > >>>>> 
> > >>>>> It's probably good to identify one component at a time to pull out
> > >>>>> of the code base and do it that way.  And it probably should be
> > >>>>> the task of whoever is going to take the reins for that component
> > >>>>> to move the files and modify them as necessary (in connection with
> > >>>>> people working on any components that rely on it).  Since each
> > >>>>> component probably requires more than just copying the files to
> > >>>>> the new folder structure, it's probably best for each component to
> > >>>>> be done in a branch of its own, that way every commit on main
> > >>>>> works even if there is some breakage in the branch. It also allows
> > >>>>> for multiple people, such as the person creating the component and
> > >>>>> people working on components that rely on it, to collaborate on
> > >>>>> factoring out each piece. Due to the interconnectedness, commits
> > >>>>> on the branch may not work but we'll be sure the project works
> > >>>>> before merging each component back onto main.
> > >>>>> 
> > >>>>>> I wonder if 3 components (backend, render, and BibleTime) are the
> > >>>>>> right breakdown. There may be other things we should separate such
> > >>>>>> as the config system.
> > >>>>> 
> > >>>>> I'm not sure what our config system does that isn't part of the
> > >>>>> normal Qt cross-platform config system.  I would have guessed that
> > >>>>> any config systems would be part of the GUI component, but you
> > >>>>> probably know better than I.
> > >>>>> 
> > >>>>> --Greg
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > bt-devel mailing list
> > bt-devel at crosswire.org
> > http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/bt-devel
> 
> _______________________________________________
> bt-devel mailing list
> bt-devel at crosswire.org
> http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/bt-devel