Design for 2.0?
46 views
Skip to first unread message
Kevin Lustic
Jan 4, 2016, 7:04:53 PM1/4/16
to LightShow Pi Developers
Hey all, Happy New Year!
First let me state that I'm a happy customer, who received a Pi2 from a friend and had no idea what to do with it. So I Googled for cool projects and 1 day down the rabbit hole I came upon this community. A week later I had learned a crap ton about electricity and hardware and built my own setup. So, cheers for the exciting and incredibly doable project you've all cooked up!
As I read the discussions, I see ideas for features in 2.0. What do you guys think about redesigning the code base to clean it up a bit for 2.0? Of course, adding sweet features as well :) But looking through the code base it could use a little TLC, which will become much more important as the project continues to gain interest and grow. Has anyone proposed a design for the 2.0 software architecture?
I'm no engineer but linked are some ideas to hopefully stir up conversation! (also attached, for archaeologists examining the ruins of my Google Drive)
https://goo.gl/UyOYp8
First let me state that I'm a happy customer, who received a Pi2 from a friend and had no idea what to do with it. So I Googled for cool projects and 1 day down the rabbit hole I came upon this community. A week later I had learned a crap ton about electricity and hardware and built my own setup. So, cheers for the exciting and incredibly doable project you've all cooked up!
As I read the discussions, I see ideas for features in 2.0. What do you guys think about redesigning the code base to clean it up a bit for 2.0? Of course, adding sweet features as well :) But looking through the code base it could use a little TLC, which will become much more important as the project continues to gain interest and grow. Has anyone proposed a design for the 2.0 software architecture?
I'm no engineer but linked are some ideas to hopefully stir up conversation! (also attached, for archaeologists examining the ruins of my Google Drive)
https://goo.gl/UyOYp8
Tom Enos
Jan 4, 2016, 8:28:05 PM1/4/16
to LightShow Pi Developers
I agree with most of this. I started porting to python3 at one point and found that there were a few libraries that were not available in python3. They might be available now it's been at least a year since the last time I checked.
I was also thinking we could switch web.py to twisted and have it also send the network code as well. Twisted is WSGI complaint and in my testing manages the connections for the network code well (TPC beats UDP). I still need to check out the footprint and speed. But it's really easy to work with once you get the api. But to be honest anything more then web.py is probably overkill for a local network only web page.
I also have thought about moving the audio setup to the hardware manager. It is the audio hardware that being controlled.
I also have thought about moving the audio setup to the hardware manager. It is the audio hardware that being controlled.
As for the docstrings I did most of that. I need to update a few and then regenerate the doc.
Tom Enos
Jan 10, 2016, 3:58:37 AM1/10/16
to LightShow Pi Developers
I found one other draw back in porting to python3. It is not the default on Raspbian. And as Raspbian is our primary target OS we should stick to python2.
On Monday, January 4, 2016 at 4:04:53 PM UTC-8, Kevin Lustic wrote:
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages