[IPOL discuss] testing the new version of the demos

[Nicolas Limare]

> 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:

Thanks for your feedback.

> *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.

OK, I corrected the README.txt file, it will be in the daily source
code snapshot tonight.
For your information, the "build" step is not automatically performed
because any autoimatic reload (triggered by a file modified while the
server is running) would imply a re-build, including re-download of
the source codes.

> *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.

Maybe it was a temporary network problem. There has been some router
reconfiguration on the ENS network lately.

> *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..."

Until September, only jose-Luis and I needed to modify these pages,
and as we are wiki admins there was no problem. But you should also
be able to edit the demo documentation. So I just unlocked all the
admin/demo pages.

PS: The wiki system was good and usable when starting IPOL, but it's
gradually showing its limits, particularly in handling the users and
permissions. If some of you know about flexible content management
systems (plone? django?), I'd like to heare your suggestions.

> *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)?

git requires ssh access, but is located on the demo server, and this
server is not adapted to multiple user accounts. So for the moment, we
are stuck to these tar.gz snapshots. But I heard today that the CMLA server
room equipment will be installed this Thursday. We will start to
install the new demo server immediately after, and I think that within
one week we will have an development server (with ssh accounts and git
repositories) on the current server.

> *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.

That's possible,. sure,  but I don't see the benefit of using
self.input_0 instead of "input_0.png".

> Some more issues:
> *there is an untold dependency of ccache on one of the demos.

The makefile for this demo is probably not correctly writen, it should
only use ccache if it is available. Do you know which one it is?

> *some code appears to be missing, when building my_affine_sift i get
> the following error:

Yes, I will solve this issue with the ASIFT author.

-- 
Nicolas LIMARE
http://nicolas.limare.net/                         pgp:0xFA423F4F
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://tools.ipol.im/mailman/archive/discuss/attachments/20101122/381fa6ff/attachment-0001.pgp>