Hi Dimitry,

your mail is far to abstract for me. You only write: "it is everything
too complex." without any concrete references.
And if you find this references, I would propose that you spend your
time better in documenting them or - at least - to
write an email to me with the request for documentation or explanation.

Regards, Chris

Dimitry Polivaev schrieb:
> Hello,
>
> last days I have spent many time analyzing current state of the program 
> design. And I have run into troubles: IMHO the complexity of the program 
> which can be measured on amount of different interfaces, classes and 
> dependencies between them, is significantly bigger than required by the 
> features we have. The purposes of many classes and the patterns they 
> follow are neither documented nor self evident, the class and methods 
> names are not really helpful either.
>
> Because simplicity and clarity of the program design is very important 
> for both its long life and my satisfaction as a developer, I am not very 
> happy about it.
>
> I see the following ways to deal with the problem:
>
> 1. Because the only two persons significantly contributed to the program 
> in the last years, we could try to exchange and complete our knowledge.
>
> We could provide a javadoc documentation explaining the intention of the 
> relevant classes and packages. We could also use any kind of synchronous 
> communication with the purpose of understanding the things before trying 
> to change them. We could use chat, skype or phone, but I could also 
> personally come to Berlin for one or two sessions. This way we could 
> design the changes together.
>
> 2. Alternatively I could develop a new design by myself. The new design 
> would have a relatively small kernel and further mutually independent 
> packages depending only on this small kernel.
>
> The new design would extensively use the Extension Object pattern 
> proposed by Erich Gamma and used in Eclipse. The pattern is described in
> his book "Contributing to eclipse", it is also explained in
>
> http://www-st.inf.tu-dresden.de/Lehre/WS04-05/dpf/slides/9-framework-extensibility.pdf
>
> (Personally I have read the book, the pdf is just a link returned by 
> google).
>
> This pattern makes possible attaching of the any extension objects to 
> some object which does not depend on them by itself. Using this pattern 
> we could attach new actions to the controller or new model elements to 
> maps or nodes without changing their own code.
>
> Such design would make no difference between managing of the freemind 
> "native" actions and model elements and of the elements coming from a 
> plug-in. (NodeView is already able to display added elements, it results 
> >from refactoring I did 2007). The current plug-in framework (which IMHO 
> is very difficult to use and to understand) could be replaced by more 
> transparent and light-weight solution. But if I had to work alone, I 
> would be not able to consider Chris's ideas and wishes.
>
> Dear Chris, that's why I would like to ask you to write your wishes 
> about how to organize our work and communication here if this list.
>
> Best regards, Dimitry
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
> _______________________________________________
> Freemind-developer mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freemind-developer
>
>   


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace
_______________________________________________
Freemind-developer mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freemind-developer

Reply via email to