Stefan, You mentioned good ideas in your e-mail.
It seems to me that these proposed rules would be a good start for a set OpenJUMP Developer Guideline's. I would be willing to put together a document with the guidelines, starting with only the rules in Stefan's e-mail, if others think it is a good idea. I'm not wanting to hit someone over the head with a book of rules, but I think it would be a good idea to have this guidance for programmers in one spot. Stefan wrote: "And related to that I think the location and naming of new functions need to be "approved" by at least 3 people." It seems, at least by the amount of e-mail, that there is quite a bit or OJ development going on in recent weeks. The increased activity would seem to benefit from at least a wee bit more structure and coordination. I'd suggest these "3 people" be our reformed development committee. I would suggest as members, if they were willing, Stefan, Michael, and Ede. They seem to be the most active. This is just a suggestion. :] Landon On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Stefan Steiniger <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi all, > > now, after having sent of the other email, I tried to analyse why I am > actually unhappy with what happened. It came out pretty simple: > > "I was used to the old naming and menu positions" > > furthermore, there was just right now an email on the user list about > > "Where is that function gone" (in this case datastore query). > > It highlights a couple of things, that we can summarize as "don't change > the "User API" without a clear announcement". But in detail: > > - if we change names, then users may not found the function anymore > - if we change the menu positions of functions, then users may not found > them anymore > > further: > - names should be descriptive > - names should adhere to standards (not necessarily to ArcGIS, but > sometimes...) > > I also recognized the following: > - ESRI never changed names of function as long as I remember, except > maybe when they moved from 8.x to 9.x and got a complete new user interface > - ESRI is using function names that are not very descriptive all the > time, but they try to restrict it to one word - which describes the > action, e.g. "eliminate", "dissolve", "union", "spatial join". > - I actually do not aggree with some ESRI naming of functions, since the > technical standards (OGC SFS) use actually different names (union vs. > intersection, dissolve vs. union). But I guess the reason is that the > standards are younger than ArcInfo/GIS. > > So, based on that I see a need for the next release notes (for 1.5.1) to > 1) describe somewhere what functions have been renamed and moved (quite > a bit). > 2) To introduce proper naming and location rules. And related to that I > think the location and naming of new functions need to be "approved" by > at least 3 people - and not changed anymore thereafter until a major > release ("X.X"). > > Any further opinions? > > stefan > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Try before you buy = See our experts in action! > The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers > is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3, > Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now! > http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-dev2 > _______________________________________________ > Jump-pilot-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Try before you buy = See our experts in action! The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3, Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-dev2 _______________________________________________ Jump-pilot-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel
