You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@isis.apache.org by Dan Haywood <da...@haywood-associates.co.uk> on 2013/02/01 09:29:23 UTC
Re: Oehhh, that would be nice
Hi Minto,
Looks interesting, are you offering :-)?
My reckoning (based mostly on writing the wicket and restfulobject viewers)
is that it takes about 20 days' work to spike a viewer, then 50~100 days'
work to complete the thing.
You'll have seen that Maurizio is embarking on building a DHTMLX viewer; I
was also contacted by someone earlier this week about building an Apache
Flex viewer to run over RO. I asked him to post his plans the mailing
list, which he hasn't chosen to yet.
I'm also considering writing a new viewer to run as Windows Store App (aka
"Metro"), also over RO.... you can see some initial screen mockups at [1].
Cheers
Dan
[1] https://github.com/danhaywood/ro-winstoreapp
On 31 January 2013 20:55, Minto van der Sluis <mi...@xup.nl> wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> Just stumbled upon http://www.codenameone.com
>
> It would be nice to have an Isis and/or RestfullObjects viewer for
> Codename One.
>
> Just a thought I wanted to share :-)
>
> Regards,
>
> Minto
>
> --
> ir. ing. Minto van der Sluis
> Software innovator / renovator
> Xup BV
>
>
Re: Oehhh, that would be nice
Posted by Minto van der Sluis <mi...@xup.nl>.
BTW what is the current status of RO upgrade from 0.52 to version 1.0.
There was some activity on the ML a while ago, but it seem to have dried
up.
> I've just written an article on RO for a journal, where I promised that
> there would be work done on it over the next few months. So I guess I'd
> better follow through on that....
>
> Actually, Jeroen and I have this morning just hatched a plan where I'm
> planning to do a little refactoring of some of the RO functionality to make
> it more generally reusable (to serialize objects as JSON for publishing).
> So perhaps as part of that I'll fill in some of the missing gaps.
I am willing to help out here, just to improve my knowledge on RO. This
comes in handy if I ever DO embark on writing a client RO viewer.
To begin with are there small steps that I could perform to improve the
existing RO implementation?
--
ir. ing. Minto van der Sluis
Software innovator / renovator
Xup BV
Mobiel: +31 (0) 626 014541
Re: Oehhh, that would be nice
Posted by Maurizio Taverna <ta...@gmail.com>.
>
> > > My reckoning (based mostly on writing the wicket and restfulobject
> > viewers)
> > > is that it takes about 20 days' work to spike a viewer, then 50~100
> days'
> > > work to complete the thing.
> > How much work is involved in writing a generic client side RO based
> > viewer. I guess it also depends on the technology being used.
> >
>
> Reckon it's about the same. Maurizio ... if you're reading this, perhaps
> you could keep track?
>
>
I will, we estimated 60 days for the DHTMLX viewer.
Maurizio
2013/2/1 Dan Haywood <da...@haywood-associates.co.uk>
> On 1 February 2013 11:19, Minto van der Sluis <mi...@xup.nl> wrote:
>
> > > Looks interesting, are you offering :-)?
> > I would love to, but I wonder if I ever get it finished due to time
> > constraints ;-)
> >
>
> I hear you!
>
>
>
> > > My reckoning (based mostly on writing the wicket and restfulobject
> > viewers)
> > > is that it takes about 20 days' work to spike a viewer, then 50~100
> days'
> > > work to complete the thing.
> > How much work is involved in writing a generic client side RO based
> > viewer. I guess it also depends on the technology being used.
> >
>
> Reckon it's about the same. Maurizio ... if you're reading this, perhaps
> you could keep track?
>
>
> >
> > BTW what is the current status of RO upgrade from 0.52 to version 1.0.
> > There was some activity on the ML a while ago, but it seem to have dried
> > up.
> >
>
> I've just written an article on RO for a journal, where I promised that
> there would be work done on it over the next few months. So I guess I'd
> better follow through on that....
>
> Actually, Jeroen and I have this morning just hatched a plan where I'm
> planning to do a little refactoring of some of the RO functionality to make
> it more generally reusable (to serialize objects as JSON for publishing).
> So perhaps as part of that I'll fill in some of the missing gaps.
>
> Cheers
> Dan
>
Re: Oehhh, that would be nice
Posted by Dan Haywood <da...@haywood-associates.co.uk>.
On 1 February 2013 11:19, Minto van der Sluis <mi...@xup.nl> wrote:
> > Looks interesting, are you offering :-)?
> I would love to, but I wonder if I ever get it finished due to time
> constraints ;-)
>
I hear you!
> > My reckoning (based mostly on writing the wicket and restfulobject
> viewers)
> > is that it takes about 20 days' work to spike a viewer, then 50~100 days'
> > work to complete the thing.
> How much work is involved in writing a generic client side RO based
> viewer. I guess it also depends on the technology being used.
>
Reckon it's about the same. Maurizio ... if you're reading this, perhaps
you could keep track?
>
> BTW what is the current status of RO upgrade from 0.52 to version 1.0.
> There was some activity on the ML a while ago, but it seem to have dried
> up.
>
I've just written an article on RO for a journal, where I promised that
there would be work done on it over the next few months. So I guess I'd
better follow through on that....
Actually, Jeroen and I have this morning just hatched a plan where I'm
planning to do a little refactoring of some of the RO functionality to make
it more generally reusable (to serialize objects as JSON for publishing).
So perhaps as part of that I'll fill in some of the missing gaps.
Cheers
Dan
Re: Oehhh, that would be nice
Posted by Minto van der Sluis <mi...@xup.nl>.
Hi Dan,
Op 1-2-2013 9:29, Dan Haywood schreef:
> Hi Minto,
> Looks interesting, are you offering :-)?
I would love to, but I wonder if I ever get it finished due to time
constraints ;-)
> My reckoning (based mostly on writing the wicket and restfulobject viewers)
> is that it takes about 20 days' work to spike a viewer, then 50~100 days'
> work to complete the thing.
How much work is involved in writing a generic client side RO based
viewer. I guess it also depends on the technology being used.
>
> You'll have seen that Maurizio is embarking on building a DHTMLX viewer; I
> was also contacted by someone earlier this week about building an Apache
> Flex viewer to run over RO. I asked him to post his plans the mailing
> list, which he hasn't chosen to yet.
>
> I'm also considering writing a new viewer to run as Windows Store App (aka
> "Metro"), also over RO.... you can see some initial screen mockups at [1].
This sounds very interesting as well.
BTW what is the current status of RO upgrade from 0.52 to version 1.0.
There was some activity on the ML a while ago, but it seem to have dried up.
>
> Cheers
> Dan
>
> [1] https://github.com/danhaywood/ro-winstoreapp
>
>
> On 31 January 2013 20:55, Minto van der Sluis <mi...@xup.nl> wrote:
>
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> Just stumbled upon http://www.codenameone.com
>>
>> It would be nice to have an Isis and/or RestfullObjects viewer for
>> Codename One.
>>
>> Just a thought I wanted to share :-)
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Minto
>>
>> --
>> ir. ing. Minto van der Sluis
>> Software innovator / renovator
>> Xup BV
>>
>>
--
ir. ing. Minto van der Sluis
Software innovator / renovator
Xup BV
Mobiel: +31 (0) 626 014541