[Pipet Devel] directory structure

J.W. Bizzaro bizzaro at geoserve.net
Thu Jun 15 12:20:41 EDT 2000

Brad Chapman wrote:
> Well, even though this isn't the question either, I'll answer it
> anyways :-). I don't really see that there will be a need to share
> modules between uils. In the first place, hopefully too many more
> people aren't going to write uils in python (so that we can
> demonstrate that other languages work). Secondly, if there is a lot of
> share functionality between uils, then it should go in the dl, right?
> Common modules is just kind of inviting a mess, IMO, especially when
> people are installing just one UI (how many people besides developers
> are going to have multiple ones).
>     Where do you see the need for such common modules?

The last time we talked about UI widgets (particularly Gtk GUI widgets), we
were thinking about them being "Bonobo widgets" (that is, widgets that have
Bonobo bindings or whatever).  The thought was that Bonobo provided a
language-independent way to display widgets.  So, I thought there might be


directory.  /BUT/ that was before we found out about BlueBox.  This is what
I'm now hoping BlueBox will provide: our widget set.  Yeah, I suppose then we
won't be putting any BlueBox stuff directly into the package directory, so
maybe this is not an issue right now...at least not until we find out more
about BlueBox.

> The reason I decided to have each different uil (peep or pied or
> whatever else there will be) in the top level directory if because of
> the reason you mentioned earlier, about having uil modules be separate
> in cvs from the main piper distribution. That way, if a user wants
> Pied and it is not included in the main distribution, the only have to
> get the Pied tarball and stick it in the main directory of piper, and
> then run configure with the option --with-pied.

They could just stick it in the piper/uil directory too.  But, if the only
things that go in piper/uil are the UI's AND /NO/ SHARED COMPONENTS (which
will always be present in the package), then maybe dropping the UI's in root
is simplest.  I don't know.  Besides, Peep will always come with the
package.......it's not like it has been dropped in by the user.

> On the other hand, if
> pied also depends on this shared modules, and they don't have that
> installed yet, then they need to get that also, and whatever, it just
> seems like a bigger pain to deal with.
>     Does this make sense? Whadda you think? Is this way okay?

If my unconvincing argument doesn't convince you, then I'll put it in as is. 
What do you say?

                      |           J.W. Bizzaro           |
                      |                                  |
                      | http://bioinformatics.org/~jeff/ |
                      |                                  |
                      |        BIOINFORMATICS.ORG        |
                      |           The Open Lab           |
                      |                                  |
                      |    http://bioinformatics.org/    |

More information about the Pipet-Devel mailing list