Re: bond

[Dru <andru treshna com>]

John (J5) Palmieri wrote:

> On Mon, 2003-07-28 at 01:04, Dru wrote:
>  
>
> > Hello I've been on this list for a quite a while but dont say much. 
> > For the last 2 years I've been working making a GTK work nicely with 
> > databases and allowing for the rapid application development of 
> > databases under gnome.  At the moment I have a large collection of 
> > libraries for doing all the work. You can create reports, and complex 
> > GTK front ends to databases. The whole thing is bound together by XML 
> > files. My idea for getting this to work would be to use anjuta/scoffold
> >    
> I just want to make sure you inserstand that Anjuta and Scaffold are two
> different projects. Anjuta is teh full featured IDE while Scaffold is
> the still Alpha (yet very usable) modular IDE.  You should choose which
> one you wish to target though I would say targetting Scaffold would be
> best because a) I'm a developer ;-) and b) the modular and Alpha nature
> means you can experiment a bit more.  Anjuta is becoming more modular
> and at some point I hope Scaffold plugins will be usable in Anjuta.
I dont need stablity at this point. My own code is alpha though isn't 
reliant on a IDE and I'm more interested in long term direction. 

> > as an ide for building the applications and maybe modify glade2 to store 
> > additional information used by bond to establish database information.  
> >    
> I would work on glade 3 since it will hopefully be the next generation
> embedable UI designer.  But then again this is another highly alpha
> codebase.  So you need to decide you want to make the next generation
> database IDE or do you want to get to stable as fast as possible.
Do you know who is working on it? I think there should be a plugin in 
envoriment for glade,
where you can intergrade gnome-db widgets if you download the plugin for 
it (library or xmlfile or both) or have a plugin for bond that would 
allow you to add in additional information on the widgets.

> Ok with me though I am not convinced this is an application wizard sort
>
> of thing.  Why complex makefiles?  Do you use pkg-config?  That should
> greatly simplify the makefiles.
>
> I havn't gotten around to writting this up but I belive wizzards are
> inheriently wrong for IDE's.  It is like driving a kid to the mall for
> the first time, giving them a list of things to buy and then telling
> them to find their own way home.  In my opinion if a person uses a
> library it should be added to the makefile.  A person should not have to
> decide all at once they want to use database functionality.  If they use
> it then it should be intergated at that point.  What happens if somone
> is writting an app that uses flat files as a datastore and they all of a
> sudden relize they want to use a database.  Should they have to create a
> new project to do so?  Wizards are great starting points but an IDE
> needs to be able to help out the programmer along the way.  Database
> library integration should not be a starting point but ongoing guide to
> the programmer.
In regard to bond projects (developed by the user) its not greatly 
complex, but you do need
to know how to create makefiles for gtk, and add all the libraries in 
that are needed.
I dont think it is so much about creating the makefiles but creating the 
makefiles in the right fashion so that they will be portable and neat. I 
use to provide template empty projects to help in creating hte 
applications.
I havn't used pkg-config, I just use autoconf. I use to use the gnome1 
equivialant to pkg-config.

I kind of agree with you with wizards but I also see theres more to it 
than that. Its always good
having a starting point. Adding things like unified version numbering 
and project name, building
rpm/deb packages for your project, adding a library to your project all 
these things are hard things if your using autoconf tools (hope i dont 
sound like an newbie).  What I would like to see having a wizard at the 
start where you can choose no makefile, basic makefile, autoconf, 
autoconf + deb & rpm etc when you create a project. Then having a option 
under projects to add more packages to it (getting list from 
pkg-config). So you start with the basic terminal programme but you can 
add gtk if you want it, or add bond or add libxml etc which then edits 
the associated files.
I think its good to have a working makefile to start from. 

> > I can create the logo etc but it does mean you'll have more than one 
> > page of options for creating a projects.  I can do the coding if someone 
> > points me in the right direction with whats files it resides on any 
> > design considerations you want. I could also help in getting debian 
> > support in the application wizard.
> >    
> gnome-build module in CVS I belive holds the wizzards for Scaffold projects.  
> I could be wrong and it might be in the main Anjuta2 (Anjuta2 is the old name of Scaffold.  
> We are in the process of changing the name because as I said Anjuta and Anjuta2 are actualy 
> two seperate projects).
>
> After I am done with the rename I plan on working on GObject code
> generation which will flesh out my ideas on interactive code
> generation.   It would be great if you were interested in such a route
> for the database integration.  Can you send me over a small example of
> how your libraries work?  Things such as what code needs to be added to
> the sources and makefiles would allow me to make some design suggestions
> if you would like.
>
> I hope you choose Scaffold to integrate Bond into.  Database tools would
> be great.
>
> --
> J5
>  
Do you know if gnome going to be intergrated into scaffold? I'll work on 
getting pkg-config support into bond first and keep coding. I'll wait 
till the name change over has been complete and we know a bit further 
where we are going with interactive code generation.