In reference to the 4th item in the list:
By default, the oplets tend to be a bit cluttered. Is there any way to remedy that? Also, I really like how you can drag the oplets, but it can be frustrating with the popup that appears when you hover over an oplet. I think would be more user-friendly if it disappeared faster on hover out. On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 2:33 PM, Dan Debrunner <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wednesday, March 9, 2016 11:39 AM, "[email protected]" < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > I'd like for the console to be more usable and relevant to quarks > > application developers. I'm also hoping by asking for feedback and ideas > > for improvements someone may decide they would like to make a > contribution to > > the console. > > > 1. Display oplet aliases (application assigned names) instead of the > > 'OP_X' in the topology graph > > 2. Alternately, remove the 'OP_X' and just assign the index value in the > > graph '0', '1', etc > > Somewhat related to this is there should be a view that represents how a > developer coded their application, which is through the topology api, where > (for the most part) oplets do not exist. I'm not sure what exactly this > would look like, but it's a move away from having oplets as the first class > objects, to having streams and windows as the first class objects. Maybe > such a graph would look similar but the focus would not be on oplets, e.g. > oplet names like OP_1 have no meaning to the application developer. > > We may in the future have the physical representation (oplets) be heavily > transformed from the logical view (topology), so in that case having a > logical view is much more useful, e.g. imagine an extreme case where the > graph has been optimized down to a single oplet. > > See: https://github.com/quarks-edge/quarks/wiki/Quarks-Etiao-Runtime > > > > 3. If a topology has counter metrics on all oplets (i.e, > DevelopmentProvider is > > used) either a) remove all oplets from the graph or b) make the counter > ops look > > less significant or 'grey' them out from the graph. > > I think there are a number of oplets where the visualization could be > simplified, e.g. FanIn, Union Isolate etc. could be not shown in the > graph, as they are low-level building blocks somewhat unrelated to the > application graph. > > > Dan. >
