So what's the feeling on posting code here for maintenance? I am pretty committed now to writing the VRML module, and I have some working code that will allow people to begin using it now. But its an 0.1 release and its not OO'ified. I got very good results from posting snippets thus far, and will be revising it.

So I am thinking of posting a node somewhere (suggestions for section are appreciated, and continually referring to it (rather than my home node) as I update it. This way not only do I get peer review when I need it, but I also get people casually looking at it and making suggestions.

So would it be okay to post some code and just keep updating it? Most of our nodes here are pretty static. It also does not require a new "peer review" section if I post it in, say, Cool Uses For Perl or Craft.

Comments?

le dep.

--
Laziness, Impatience, Hubris, and Generosity.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Continually updated code (discussion)
by Sherlock (Deacon) on May 11, 2001 at 17:39 UTC
    I think it would be great to be able to see code as it develops. (Not to mention that I'm rather interested in a VRML module.) I can only think of one problem that I can't really find a good solution for to make this work well: How will people know when the code is modified?

    Unless you have a few people dedicated to checking your node every couple days, I'm afraid that it might be forgotten to anyone that wasn't directly involved with it. I considered making a post (possibly in "Discussion") that would let everyone know that it's been updated, but I think that would simply end up cluttering the Monastery with "Look over here now" posts. I guess I really don't have a good solution for this.

    Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see the code online and I'd love to see it develop - I just don't want it to get "lost." If someone can think of a good way to overcome this little hitch, I think it would work great. Regardless, I'd like to see your code posted because I'd, at least, take periodic looks at it.

    - Sherlock

    Skepticism is the source of knowledge as much as knowledge is the source of skepticism.
[reply]
Re: Continually updated code (discussion)
by arturo (Vicar) on May 11, 2001 at 17:51 UTC

    I might try this (IIRC< epoptai's done this with framechat already): post v.1 in Craft and include (in the comment body) a link to your home node or possibly directly to a location from which the latest version can be downloaded. 'Course, you'll need a stable, reliable connection for that.

    Update No, I guess epoptai hasn't done that (yet, anyhow =)

    Three cheers for the "Generosity" bit =) 

    perl -e 'print "How sweet does a rose smell? "; chomp $n = <STDIN>; $r
+ose = "smells sweet to degree $n"; *other_name = *rose; print "$other
+_name\n"'

    [download]
[reply]
[d/l]
      framechat does have the ability to check for an updated version of itself on perlmonks as arturo suggests.

      This is done by providing a link on the help page that compares the script's version info with a hidden tag on a small node containing the current version info. reputer also has this feature.

      Update: deprecated asks for elaboration:

      The script contains the following hash: 

      my%info = ( version => '1.2', date => '20010510' );

      [download]
      A small node on perlmonks contains the following HTML comment: 
      <!--INFO:version=1.1,date=20010415-->

      [download]
      To check for an update, the user clicks a link that downloads the version node and compares it with the %info hash, if they differ a message with links to the new code appear. See the source links above for the code that does it.

      Perhaps a similar strategy can be used for a module, but having it check at intervals.

[reply]
[d/l]
[select]
      'Course, you'll need a stable, reliable connection for that.

      That shouldn't be a hard problem anymore for any PM user...

      Dr. Michael K. Neylon - mneylon-pm@masemware.com || "You've left the lens cap of your mind on again, Pinky" - The Brain
[reply]
(dws)Re: Continually updated code (discussion)
by dws (Chancellor) on May 11, 2001 at 20:41 UTC
    If part of your purpose for posting code is for others to send you fixes, then it will help greatly to embed a file version stamp in each file. That provides a way for people to do a quick check to see if the module they just reviewed or extended has been updated, and it provides you with a quick check to see if submitted code is based on older versions of files. Any decent source-code control system will provide a way to embed a version string in a file.

    Your cause is also going to be helped by having a complete test suite corresponding to each package you're publishing. You can then enforce that any submissions need to pass the published tests, and that any newly submitted functionality needs to be covered by new tests. It also provides a backstop to help prevent your posting broken code.

[reply]
Re: Continually updated code (discussion)
by larsen (Parson) on May 11, 2001 at 19:00 UTC
    Once I asked for a way to know the date of the last update of a node. Maybe for a misunderstanding (I was talking about "submission" instead of the more correct "update") that proposal didn't become so popular.

    What I was thinking about was something like [id://#####,date]. Having such a device, one could write a script that check for updates for the nodes he is subscribed to. Another possibility could be adding a smart link (e.g. [id://#####], last updated [id://#####,date]) in our homenode, so that we could check for updates simply logging in and looking at our homenode.

    Update: We could also use a new tag, for example <update>, manually adding the date of the last update of the node. "Subscription scripts" could be written as easily as described above, I suppose.

[reply]
[d/l]
[select]
Re: Continually updated code (discussion)
by DrZaius (Monk) on May 11, 2001 at 19:19 UTC
    Why not use something like cvsweb? It works well, and you are using cvs anyway, right?

    Maybe create a node of sorts that interfaces with sourceforges cvs?

[reply]

Back to Perl Monks Discussion