[IGSTK-Developers] Release 1 - Iteration 3?

[Kevin Gary]

Hi Luis,

Sorry I did not get back to you yesterday.

What goes into the Iteration is your call. I see you have
posted the list on the Wiki, so I encourage people to start
signing up. I was wondering if implementing (1) was a minor
shift or not, it sounds like a reasonably significant change.
Also, I wasn't sure if the real-time clock approach (2) used
by Hee Su was the direction you wanted to go, but again I
leave these things to your judgement. We can get an update
on how these 2 activities are going (and nudge people to
sign up for reviews) on Thursday.

Thanks,
K2


Luis Ibanez wrote:
> 
> Hi Kevin,
> 
> Actually most of the files that were modified for Iteration 3
> are already in the basic IGSTK library. This includes:
> 
> - PulseGenerator
> - TrackerTool
> - SpatialObject
> - Transform
> - TransformModifiedEvent
> - View
> 
> 
> The files remaining in the Sandbox are the ones used for
> the "Tracker Wrapping" approach. More specifically:
> 
>  - AtamaiNDITracker
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would suggest that we do the following things before closing
> Iteration 3:
> 
>   1) Implement the shift of the boundary between the Pull and
>      Push regions of the pipeline, as we discussed at the meeting.
>      This will involve to have PulseGenerators in the Views and
>      let them pull data from the TrackerTools. The TrackerTools
>      and SpatialObjects will not be pushing data anymore.
> 
>   2) Implement the real time clock for the PulseGenerator from
>      code that Hee-Su sent.
> 
> At that point we could do a code review of the classes, which
> in this case will have to include the following classes:
> 
> 
> igstkCylinderObject
> igstkCylinderObjectRepresentation
> igstkEllipsoidObject
> igstkEllipsoidObjectRepresentation
> igstkEvents
> igstkMacros
> igstkObjectRepresentation
> igstkPulseGenerator
> igstkScene
> igstkSpatialObject
> igstkStateMachine
> igstkTimeStamp
> igstkTracker
> igstkTrackerPort
> igstkTrackerTool
> igstkTransform
> igstkTransformModifiedEvent
> igstkView
> 
> 
> I added a section for Iteration 3 in the Code Reviews pages
> on the Wiki:
> 
> http://public.kitware.com/IGSTKWIKI/index.php/Iteration_Code_Reviews
> 
> Iteration 3:
> http://public.kitware.com/IGSTKWIKI/index.php/Iteration_Code_Reviews#Iteration_3_.28April_2005.29 
> 
> 
> With a table containing the classes above.
> 
> 
> I'm looking at implementing action items (1) and (2), and once
> we are done with them, we could proceed to the coder review in
> order to close Iteration 3.
> 
> 
> Please let me know if this sounds reasonable.
> 
> 
>    Thanks
> 
> 
>      Luis
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------
> Kevin Gary wrote:
> 
>> Luis,
>>
>> I was wondering what our status is with respect to code reviews
>> for Iteration 3. Is there a set of files targeted to be moved
>> from the sandbox to the main branch and be tagged? If it is
>> possible, I'd like to get the list out on the wiki so we can
>> organize the reviews and call Iteration 3 (and internal release 1)
>> done.
>>
>> Next week's tcon will be Wednesday at 2pm instead of Thursday,
>> with our main discussion topic setting specific goals for at
>> least the first few iterations of Release 2.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> K2
>>
> 
> 
> 


-- 
===
Kevin A. Gary, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
DCST, ASU East
(480)727-1373
http://kgary2.east.asu.edu
kgary at asu.edu

====
This message and any attachments are confidential. Unauthorized use
or disclosure of this message is strictly prohibited, and this message
must be destroyed immediately if received by an unauthorized recipient.
====