[IPOL discuss] testing the new version of the demos
Juan Cardelino
juanc at fing.edu.uy
Thu Nov 18 13:20:15 CET 2010
Some more issues:
*there is an untold dependency of ccache on one of the demos.
*some code appears to be missing, when building my_affine_sift i get
the following error:
BUILD retrieving: http://www.ipol.im/pub/algo/my_affine_sift/ASIFT_png.tar.gz
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "./demo.py", line 148, in <module>
do_build(demo_dict)
File "./demo.py", line 64, in do_build
demo.build()
File "/home/juan/juanc/trabajo/ipol/ipol_demo/app/my_affine_sift/app.py",
line 62, in build
build.download(asift_tgz_url, asift_tgz_file)
File "/home/juan/juanc/trabajo/ipol/ipol_demo/lib/build.py", line
51, in download
url_handle = urllib2.urlopen(url)
File "/usr/lib/python2.6/urllib2.py", line 126, in urlopen
return _opener.open(url, data, timeout)
File "/usr/lib/python2.6/urllib2.py", line 397, in open
response = meth(req, response)
File "/usr/lib/python2.6/urllib2.py", line 510, in http_response
'http', request, response, code, msg, hdrs)
File "/usr/lib/python2.6/urllib2.py", line 435, in error
return self._call_chain(*args)
File "/usr/lib/python2.6/urllib2.py", line 369, in _call_chain
result = func(*args)
File "/usr/lib/python2.6/urllib2.py", line 518, in http_error_default
raise HTTPError(req.get_full_url(), code, msg, hdrs, fp)
urllib2.HTTPError: HTTP Error 404: Not Found
I confirmed that the file
http://www.ipol.im/pub/algo/my_affine_sift/ASIFT_png.tar.gz can't be
found.
For the moment, I will just delete this demo and keep going.
Best,
Juan
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 7:19 AM, Juan Cardelino <juanc at fing.edu.uy> wrote:
> I'm starting to re-implement my demo (which i've finished in
> september) on the new version of the code. There area a few issues I'd
> like to point out:
> *I couldn't run the demo from ipol_demo_release-20101116.tar.gz at
> first. After some hacking, I've discovered that the demo was not
> built, because I've just ran ./demo.py. Although it is mentioned
> indirectly, I think it should be explicitly said that you first need
> to do a ./demo.py build before running ./demo.py, because the default
> action is to run (without building) and the error you get is difficult
> to read at first.
> *Finally, build failed for the cm_fds_mcm_amss demo, because I had a
> timeout when downloading the code. This happened from two different
> places and at two different times of the day, so I'm sure it is not my
> problem.
> *I've tried to correct a typo on the "Anatomy of an IPOL demo" but it
> is locked. shall i pass you the location of the typo? As you said
> "correct it yourself..."
> *do we still need to get the .tar.gz? or can we get the code from git?
> if so, what is required (ssh access or whatsoever)?
> *I still think that we could avoid using hard coded names for the
> input images (input_0.png appears 4 times in the saxpb demo), can't we
> have some strings named image_0, image_1 and so on. those should be
> attributes of the app class. I'm not talking about a mandatory thing,
> but maybe if we put it in some demos, people can use the idea.
> Thats all for now.
> Best,
> Juan
>
> On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 10:26 AM, Nicolas Limare
> <nicolas.limare at cmla.ens-cachan.fr> wrote:
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> Lots of things have changed in the demo system during the last 3
>> weeks. After too much teasing, everything is now available and
>> documented.
>>
>> # source code
>>
>> You can find the source code here:
>> http://demotest.ipol.im/dl/
>>
>> Now the archives are updated every day, with the date information, and
>> 3 archives are provided:
>> * ipol_demo_lisani : Jose Luis code branch
>> * ipol_demo_nil : my code branch
>> * ipol_demo_release : the "released" code branch, as seen on
>> http://www.ipol.im/pub/demo/
>>
>> # documentation
>>
>> The documentation and tutorials are updated on
>> https://edit.ipol.im/admin/demo/. Please tell me about typos and
>> missing informations (or, better, correct it!)
>>
>> # changes
>>
>> I tried to simplify the code. The version you saw in september was the
>> first draft, and I think the design could be greatly improved. Here is
>> the list of the current changes:
>>
>> * layout
>> Now all the demos are in the /app/ subfolder. Everything else is in
>> the /lib/ subfolder. The library code has been reorganised into
>> differents files.
>> * build system
>> No more makefile; programs are built with python commands, by the
>> app.build() method. You must write this method when you create a new
>> demo; some help functions are provided in /lib/build.py, to download
>> a source code archive file, decompress it, and run its build script
>> (make, cmake, ...)
>> * 3-steps processing
>> After input data and parameters selection, the algorithm is run via
>> 3 pages/methods:
>> * app.wait() checks and saves the parameters, shows a "wait" page
>> and triggers a page refresh
>> * app.run() reads the parameters and runs the program, then triggers
>> a redirection
>> * app.result() shows the algorithm result
>> * path/url
>> No more self.path() and self.url(), they were the symptom of a bad
>> design. Now all the paths and urls are available as class
>> attributes: seld.key_dir, self.base_url
>> * template parameters
>> The app class is always passed as a parameters template (thus you
>> can use app.base_url and app.key). The urld dictionnary parameter is
>> not needed anymore, it had few benefits
>> * description
>> Instead of using the app.description attribute, you should now write
>> the algorithm description into an input.html template
>>
>> # development server
>>
>> The current situation is not flexible enough. I'd like everyone to be
>> able to access the code branches in real time, read detailed
>> changelogs, contribute, send and exchange patchs, and test the code
>> online.
>>
>> This would be achieved by a development server, with shell accesses
>> and demo instances, but the current demotest server *is* the demo
>> server, so I can't risk a server overload. Deploying and installing an
>> external development server wouldn't work either, because we need
>> some CPU power to run the demos.
>>
>> We received the next demo server last week (4x Xeon7500, 64
>> hyperthread cores). I will install it at the end of November, once the
>> lab environment is ready. Then, the current demo server will be free,
>> and we will have it available for use as a development server.
>>
>> --
>> Nicolas LIMARE
>> http://nicolas.limare.net/ pgp:0xFA423F4F
>>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>> Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
>>
>> iEYEARECAAYFAkzOseAACgkQvviFAPpCP09E2wCfaJoADm40yUDqDyUQRotCxREG
>> 4BYAoJOCLDD0fvC1hwNz2HKadwIKDLji
>> =lcM1
>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> discuss mailing list
>> discuss at list.ipol.im
>> http://tools.ipol.im/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>> Spam detection software, running on the system "smtp.fing.edu.uy", has
>> identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message
>> has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label
>> similar future email. If you have any questions, see
>> the administrator of that system for details.
>>
>> Content preview: Hi everyone, Lots of things have changed in the demo system
>> during the last 3 weeks. After too much teasing, everything is now available
>> and documented. # source code [...]
>>
>> Content analysis details: (5.4 points, 5.0 required)
>>
>> pts rule name description
>> ---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
>> 1.8 FSL_HELO_NON_FQDN_1 FSL_HELO_NON_FQDN_1
>> -1.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay
>> domain
>> 2.0 BAYES_50 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 40 to 60%
>> [score: 0.4641]
>> 2.6 HELO_NO_DOMAIN Relay reports its domain incorrectly
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
More information about the discuss
mailing list