[Paraview] PCL Plugin

[Casey Goodlett]

Hi John,

I am trying to remember the history of why that code is there, and the
reason escapes me right now.

Pat Marion: Do you remember this?

I propose that we remove it from the plugin until a time that we can sync
with your latest work.

Does that sound reasonable?


On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 5:03 AM, Biddiscombe, John A. <biddisco at cscs.ch>
wrote:

>  Casey
>
>
>
> I had a look at the PCL plugin and couldn’t help notice that you’ve copied
> some of my particle partition filtering code into the plugin, though it
> does not look functional as it’s not enabled in the cmake and does not
> include the relevant Zoltan sources or the vtkZoltanV1PartitionFilter base
> class.
>
>
>
> The partitioning (both particle and mesh) have been refactored (from the
> pv-meshles plugin) into their own self contained plugin for some time now
> and it would be cleaner in my view to have an option in the PCL plugin to
> enable parallel partitioning and use the pv-zoltan plugin as a submodule
> where necessary
>
> https://github.com/biddisco/pv-zoltan
>
>
>
> (I tend to use GitExternal and SubProject cmake modules rather than a git
> submodule, I can send links if you’re interested).
>
>
>
> The pv-zoltan code is currently under development (and is working with
> pv-4.4/master) to improve it as part of a GSOC project and should soon be
> compatible with zoltan2 rather than Zoltan. I can make sure a
> pv-4.4+zoltan1 compatible branch remains functional should we make major
> changes.
>
>
>
> I might even volunteer to do the clean integration of pv-zoltan with the
> pcl plugin should you be in need of volunteers.
>
>
>
> JB
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* ParaView [mailto:paraview-bounces at paraview.org] *On Behalf Of *Casey
> Goodlett
> *Sent:* 13 July 2015 21:16
> *To:* Eric Younkin - NOAA Federal
> *Cc:* paraview
> *Subject:* Re: [Paraview] PCL Plugin
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 1:32 PM, Eric Younkin - NOAA Federal <
> eric.g.younkin at noaa.gov> wrote:
>
> Casey,
>
>
>
> I don't mean to take up so much of your time, but I've been reviewing the
> cmake configuration and I found that there were a number of HDF5 tests that
> failed (see below).  Is that significant?
>
>
>
>
>
> I do not think this is a problem.
>
>
>
>  Also, one of the errors I saw upon rebuilding:
>
>
>
> *error C1041: cannot open program database
> 'c:\users\eric.g.younkin\documents\pcl_paraview\paraview-v4.3.1-source\build\plugins\sciberquesttoolkit\paraviewplugin\sciberquesttoolkit.dir\debug\vc120.pdb';
> if multiple CL.EXE write to the same .PDB file, please use /FS
> C:\Users\eric.g.younkin\Documents\PCL_ParaView\ParaView-v4.3.1-source\build\Plugins\SciberQuestToolKit\ParaViewPlugin\moc_pqSQFieldTracerImplementation.cpp)*
>
>
>
> Led me to the moc_pqSQFieldTracerImplementation.cpp which had a comment at
> the top stating
>
>
>
> *"This file was generated using the moc from 5.5.0. It cannot be used with
> the include files from this version of Qt. (The moc has changed too much.)"*
>
>
>
> So I will try with Qt5.4.1 instead.
>
>
>
>
>
> I am not familiar with this problem.  Maybe the filename is getting too
> long for windows?  Maybe another developer can help with the Qt issues, I
> am not an expert in this area.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> --
>
> Casey B Goodlett, PhD
> Technical Leader
> Kitware, Inc. - North Carolina Office
> http://www.kitware.com
> (919) 969-6990 x310
>



-- 
Casey B Goodlett, PhD
Technical Leader
Kitware, Inc. - North Carolina Office
http://www.kitware.com
(919) 969-6990 x310
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://public.kitware.com/pipermail/paraview/attachments/20150714/92e2ccda/attachment.html>