Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

engine and storage needs refactoring - and public API defined. #134

Closed
uniomni opened this issue Mar 27, 2012 · 5 comments
Closed

engine and storage needs refactoring - and public API defined. #134

uniomni opened this issue Mar 27, 2012 · 5 comments

Comments

@uniomni
Copy link
Contributor

uniomni commented Mar 27, 2012

As the project has evolved, it is clear that these two modules could do with some refactoring. In particular there are common utilities that both use and so should be put in their own module called - utilities.
There is much else like this that would benefit from a slight restructure.

In particular, I suggest making one module for what should be considered the public API of the engine.

@ghost ghost assigned uniomni Mar 27, 2012
@timlinux
Copy link
Contributor

I think we should also move the temp dir method in gui.is_utilities.getTempDir into such a utilities class. I wanted to fix engine/test_polygon.py so that the impossible_state.shp file didnt get written into the source tree but there wasnt an easy way to do it without breaking DRY or linking to the gui module (which I would like to avoid).

@uniomni
Copy link
Contributor Author

uniomni commented Mar 27, 2012

Already taken care of impossible state a few days ago....
o

On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 10:46 AM, Tim Sutton <
reply@reply.github.com

wrote:

I think we should also move the temp dir method in
gui.is_utilities.getTempDir into such a utilities class. I wanted to fix
engine/test_polygon.py so that the impossible_state.shp file didnt get
written into the source tree but there wasnt an easy way to do it without
breaking DRY or linking to the gui module (which I would like to avoid).


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#134 (comment)

@uniomni
Copy link
Contributor Author

uniomni commented Mar 27, 2012

Already taken care of 'impossible state' - that was just debris: 562972c

@timlinux
Copy link
Contributor

Ok great I see that now thanks. I'll backport that change to the 2.0 branch too.

Regards

Tim

@uniomni
Copy link
Contributor Author

uniomni commented Jun 19, 2012

Many modules moved and reorganised on 19th June:

  • Common area includes modules that don't rely on anything else but are used widely
  • There are no longer any references to engine from storage area
  • Imports throughout InaSAFE are a lot cleaner

Closing now

@uniomni uniomni closed this as completed Jun 19, 2012
@uniomni uniomni removed their assignment Nov 16, 2015
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants