[ImageJ-devel] service-parameters branch

[Curtis Rueden]

Hi Dscho,


> So: full steam ahead, I'll merge service-parameters after lunch and take
> care of uploading stuff.


Rock on, thanks a lot!

Cheers,
Curtis


On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 1:06 PM, Johannes Schindelin <schindelin at wisc.edu>wrote:

> Hi Curtis,
>
> On Fri, 31 Aug 2012, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 30 Aug 2012, Curtis Rueden wrote:
> >
> > > The service-parameters branch contains some improvements to how
> services
> > > declare their dependencies. It eliminates the need for those stupid
> > > no-arg constructors just to make SezPoz happy (because it eliminates
> the
> > > need for *any* explicit constructors). Rather, service dependencies are
> > > declared as @Parameters now, similar to declaring inputs in a
> > > RunnablePlugin.
> > >
> > > I tested and all seems to work well. However, as part of the
> refactoring
> > > I touched some code in core/updater. Is it still the case that code
> > > changes like this will break things for people with old versions of the
> > > updater, due to the fact that that updater updates only itself and not
> > > its dependencies? In this case, not updating
> > > imagej.service.ServiceHelper would cause a problem when creating the
> > > UploaderService in FilesUploader#createUploaderService().
> > >
> > > How do you think we should proceed? Wait a bit before merging to
> master?
> > > Or would these changes be OK?
> >
> > I fear that the way I implemented the initialization of the UploadService
> > (it is done on *any* startup of the Updater, not just when an Uploader is
> > needed), we may run into trouble.
> >
> > Having said that, the Fiji-Updater.jar I uploaded earlier this week
> should
> > remedy the problem by simply falling back to the Updater as uploaded this
> > past Monday, until a current and working Updater is available locally.
> >
> > I will test with a setup as it would be when you updated two weeks ago
> but
> > not after that, but my guess is that we should maybe wait with
> *uploading*
> > a new Updater a couple of days.
> >
> > Unfortunately, this would interfere with uploading beta4, right? Let's
> > discuss after my tests...
>
> After testing a couple of times with different levels of "up-to-dateness",
> it seems as if my recent work to make the Updater more robust really paid
> off: there is no problem running the updater. I just need to make sure to
> upload a complete IJ2 (and remove the files that were renamed/made
> obsolete) so that the Fiji Updater does not *always* fall back to the
> hard-coded remote updater (which would be the version from this past
> Monday).
>
> So: full steam ahead, I'll merge service-parameters after lunch and take
> care of uploading stuff.
>
> Ciao,
> Dscho
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://imagej.net/pipermail/imagej-devel/attachments/20120831/3f58dfa2/attachment.html>