Hi all,
I am very busy in these days with my job so excuse me if I do a cumulative
answer.
I think we should leave all things as they are for OJ 1..5.1 without modifying
anything.
But we can leave a general common discussion and open a page for an up-to-come
version of OJ (1.6? 2?) where we can define all the radical and non radical
modifications of menus and plugins.
The points.
1) As Uwe pointed it's hard to modify manuals if we have a software that is
modified every version (modified in a better way, I say). That's why I gave up
on upgrading the on-line manual/list of tool.
On the other hand OpenJUMP evolves and we need to change. It is probably time
to migrate to ELML/docbook or similar that make things more easy and fast to do.
2) To come close to academic needs, we can define a specific official version
of OpenJUMP not only when all modifications are approved by the community but
also when a basic manual, at least for Uwe's lessons, is prepared. Better if
before September (the beginning of academic lessons, I believe). For instance:
- we can freeze to add plugins or make modifications in February 2013 for the
official realize (1.6)
- on this time we modify the manual for 1.6
- the official realize can happen between August and September
- of coarse only corrections of bugs will be allowed between February and
September.
On the same hand a the programming process goes on a 1.7 NB (to come on 2014 or
2015). The only problem will be that people who correct bugs between Feb and
Sept hve to make corrections on both lineages (1.6 up-to-come-official and 1.7
NB)
Now the other points, possibly under point 2, if approved.
3) I think that the zip discussion can be included into Larry Baker's proposal
to add to OJ SkyJUMP tool that saves also the project file into the zip folder.
4) I don't use a lot delete all layer items tool. When I was studying OJ and
made may Frankenstein OpenJUMP Jufre I also realized the rescue to have this
tool close to other like toggle visibility. I would vote to hide it
5) I think we should improve menu descriptions, using icons but also changing
names. I worked more with Kosmo SAIG and I found it very easy to use and very
flexible, also because everything is well described and easy to understand,
even for newbies in GIS. As Stefan pointed out, being so far away from OJ
community, probably helped to see things in a different way. Let us leave open
the discussion.
6) +1 to group Buffer tools under a submenu.
regards and excuse me for a long mail
Giuseppe Aruta (ex-academic)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Try before you buy = See our experts in action!
The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers
is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3,
Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-dev2
_______________________________________________
Jump-pilot-devel mailing list
Jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel
