Thread: Fwd: user interface

Started: 2005-11-15 21:37:28
Last activity: 2005-11-15 21:37:28
Topics: SAC Developers
George Helffrich
2005-11-15 21:37:28

This appears to be a breathtaking step backward in capability. If I
understand GTK properly, it is:

1) not network capable like X11 (meaning you can't run SAC on one
machine and display the graphics on another machine);

2) would demand open source for SAC due to it coming under the GPL.

(2) was the motive, I thought, for opting for the {Free,Net}BSD version
of readline rather than GNU readline recently.

(1) is a drastic limitation in capability, if I understand GTK rightly:
you have to run SAC on the same computer that your display is wired to.

Finally, a word of caution/perspective. GTK resembles Tcl/Tk in that
it does not originate in an industrial consortium. PASSCAL was burned
by relying on Tcl/Tk for its PDB interface field apps: subtle
differences in new releases led to user problems in the field.

Is the feature loss, the open source implications, and the possible
release troubles worth borrowing for a spiffier SAC look?

George Helffrich
george<at>geology.bristol.ac.uk


  • Brian Savage
    2005-11-15 19:42:44
    George,

    I would argue strongly that this in *not* a step backwards in compatibility.

    1) GTK *is* network capable, GTK is built upon the X11 framework, which
    is network capable, and provides a wrapper around Xlib. By using GTK,
    you are using Xlib/X11, but creating a user interface or even drawing to
    a window is much easier. This means you can run SAC on one computer and
    view the interface on another, just as we could in the past.

    2) GTK is distributed under the GNU LGPL, which allows for linking with
    proprietary software or even BSD Licensed software. The choice of
    License for SAC will still be available to IRIS/LLNL/SAC developers.
    http://www.gtk.org/faq/#AEN81

    GTK is not Tcl/Tk. GTK is actively developed by a large number of
    contributors and is also the base for many projects, including the
    Mozilla web browser on Linux and the GNOME interface. The documentation
    for GTK is extremely good. Changes from release to release are
    documented in one place, and older deprecated functions still work while
    issuing warnings about their use.

    I would say that we are not losing any features here. The command line
    interface will still exist as will all of the underlying processing
    capability. I would even argue we would are providing a stable base for
    more features to be added.

    http://www.mozilla.org/
    http://www.gnome.org

    Cheers,
    Brian

    George Helffrich wrote:

    This appears to be a breathtaking step backward in capability. If I
    understand GTK properly, it is:

    1) not network capable like X11 (meaning you can't run SAC on one
    machine and display the graphics on another machine);

    2) would demand open source for SAC due to it coming under the GPL.

    (2) was the motive, I thought, for opting for the {Free,Net}BSD version
    of readline rather than GNU readline recently.

    (1) is a drastic limitation in capability, if I understand GTK rightly:
    you have to run SAC on the same computer that your display is wired to.

    Finally, a word of caution/perspective. GTK resembles Tcl/Tk in that it
    does not originate in an industrial consortium. PASSCAL was burned by
    relying on Tcl/Tk for its PDB interface field apps: subtle differences
    in new releases led to user problems in the field.

    Is the feature loss, the open source implications, and the possible
    release troubles worth borrowing for a spiffier SAC look?

    George Helffrich
    george<at>geology.bristol.ac.uk

    _______________________________________________
    sac-dev mailing list
    sac-dev<at>iris.washington.edu
    http://www.iris.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/sac-dev


    • Peter Goldstein
      2005-11-15 17:56:51

      Brian,

      Although I haven't downloaded and tested what you've done, I like the
      concept and appreciate your efforts.

      I'm not sure about the licensing issues, but from what I found on the
      GTK web site it sounds promising.
      I'll check to see if our legal people would have any issues with this
      and get back to you.

      Cheers,

      Peter



      At 11:42 AM -0500 11/15/05, Brian Savage wrote:
      George,

      I would argue strongly that this in *not* a step backwards in compatibility.

      1) GTK *is* network capable, GTK is built upon the X11 framework,
      which is network capable, and provides a wrapper around Xlib. By
      using GTK, you are using Xlib/X11, but creating a user interface or
      even drawing to a window is much easier. This means you can run SAC
      on one computer and view the interface on another, just as we could
      in the past.

      2) GTK is distributed under the GNU LGPL, which allows for linking
      with proprietary software or even BSD Licensed software. The choice
      of License for SAC will still be available to IRIS/LLNL/SAC
      developers.
      http://www.gtk.org/faq/#AEN81

      GTK is not Tcl/Tk. GTK is actively developed by a large number of
      contributors and is also the base for many projects, including the
      Mozilla web browser on Linux and the GNOME interface. The
      documentation for GTK is extremely good. Changes from release to
      release are documented in one place, and older deprecated functions
      still work while issuing warnings about their use.

      I would say that we are not losing any features here. The command
      line interface will still exist as will all of the underlying
      processing capability. I would even argue we would are providing a
      stable base for more features to be added.

      http://www.mozilla.org/
      http://www.gnome.org

      Cheers,
      Brian

      George Helffrich wrote:

      This appears to be a breathtaking step backward in capability. If
      I understand GTK properly, it is:

      1) not network capable like X11 (meaning you can't run SAC on one
      machine and display the graphics on another machine);

      2) would demand open source for SAC due to it coming under the GPL.

      (2) was the motive, I thought, for opting for the {Free,Net}BSD
      version of readline rather than GNU readline recently.

      (1) is a drastic limitation in capability, if I understand GTK
      rightly: you have to run SAC on the same computer that your
      display is wired to.

      Finally, a word of caution/perspective. GTK resembles Tcl/Tk in
      that it does not originate in an industrial consortium. PASSCAL
      was burned by relying on Tcl/Tk for its PDB interface field apps:
      subtle differences in new releases led to user problems in the
      field.

      Is the feature loss, the open source implications, and the possible
      release troubles worth borrowing for a spiffier SAC look?

      George Helffrich
      george<at>geology.bristol.ac.uk

      _______________________________________________
      sac-dev mailing list
      sac-dev<at>iris.washington.edu
      http://www.iris.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/sac-dev

      _______________________________________________
      sac-dev mailing list
      sac-dev<at>iris.washington.edu
      http://www.iris.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/sac-dev


      --

      Peter Goldstein, Ph.D. (925) 423-1231 (office)
      L-103, PO Box 808 (925) 422-5844 (fax)
      Livermore, CA 94551 peterg<at>llnl.gov (email)
      web pages: http://earthscience.llnl.gov/peterg/
      http://www.llnl.gov/sac

08:14:46 v.01697673