Hi Dscho,
> So: full steam ahead, I'll merge service-parameters after lunch and take > care of uploading stuff. Rock on, thanks a lot! Cheers, Curtis On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 1:06 PM, Johannes Schindelin <[email protected]>wrote: > Hi Curtis, > > On Fri, 31 Aug 2012, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > On Thu, 30 Aug 2012, Curtis Rueden wrote: > > > > > The service-parameters branch contains some improvements to how > services > > > declare their dependencies. It eliminates the need for those stupid > > > no-arg constructors just to make SezPoz happy (because it eliminates > the > > > need for *any* explicit constructors). Rather, service dependencies are > > > declared as @Parameters now, similar to declaring inputs in a > > > RunnablePlugin. > > > > > > I tested and all seems to work well. However, as part of the > refactoring > > > I touched some code in core/updater. Is it still the case that code > > > changes like this will break things for people with old versions of the > > > updater, due to the fact that that updater updates only itself and not > > > its dependencies? In this case, not updating > > > imagej.service.ServiceHelper would cause a problem when creating the > > > UploaderService in FilesUploader#createUploaderService(). > > > > > > How do you think we should proceed? Wait a bit before merging to > master? > > > Or would these changes be OK? > > > > I fear that the way I implemented the initialization of the UploadService > > (it is done on *any* startup of the Updater, not just when an Uploader is > > needed), we may run into trouble. > > > > Having said that, the Fiji-Updater.jar I uploaded earlier this week > should > > remedy the problem by simply falling back to the Updater as uploaded this > > past Monday, until a current and working Updater is available locally. > > > > I will test with a setup as it would be when you updated two weeks ago > but > > not after that, but my guess is that we should maybe wait with > *uploading* > > a new Updater a couple of days. > > > > Unfortunately, this would interfere with uploading beta4, right? Let's > > discuss after my tests... > > After testing a couple of times with different levels of "up-to-dateness", > it seems as if my recent work to make the Updater more robust really paid > off: there is no problem running the updater. I just need to make sure to > upload a complete IJ2 (and remove the files that were renamed/made > obsolete) so that the Fiji Updater does not *always* fall back to the > hard-coded remote updater (which would be the version from this past > Monday). > > So: full steam ahead, I'll merge service-parameters after lunch and take > care of uploading stuff. > > Ciao, > Dscho >
_______________________________________________ ImageJ-devel mailing list [email protected] http://imagej.net/mailman/listinfo/imagej-devel
