Re[2]: {bb} Questions on coding in version 13A

[Mark.Deiss@acs-gsg.com]

             ____________________Reply Separator____________________
             Subject:   Re: {bb} Questions on coding in version 13A 
             Author:    <bb@bb4.com>
             Date:      1/30/2000 9:26 PM
             
             
             
             >> 2) In the bin/savelog.sh file, there are several usage messages 
             >> referring to keeplog.sh instead of savelog.sh. This could cause 
             >> some puzzlement for those that get the usage error message and 
             are
             >> trying to determine where exactly the keeplog.sh script is and 
             >> what it contains. 
             
             >You've lost me here.  A sample of what's wrong would help clear
             >things up for me.
             
             The top of the bin/savelog.sh file reads as:
             
             #!/bin/sh
             
             # savelog.sh
             #
             # Robert-Andre Croteau
             # Version 1.3a
             # Dec 10th, 1999
             #
             # This program is Copyright (c) 1997-1999
             # Robert-Andre Croteau, The MacLawran Group Inc.
             # All Rights Reserved
             #
             
             if [ "$#" -ne 2 ]
             then
                echo "Usage: keeplog.sh <filename> <date>"
                exit 1
             fi
             
             
             I would suggest that the keeplog.sh phrases should be changed to 
             savelog.sh. For if and when it ever does burp, the users do not 
             get confused looking for non-existent script "keeplog.sh".
             
             >> 3) at the end of web/mkbb.sh, there is a test that there is a 
             >> bb_footer file, if there isn't then the script finishes without 
             >> adding the closure html tags to the bb.html. 
             
            > Well, technically all the nice copyright info and stuff lives in 
             the
             >footer.  So if you break it by removing the footer, then it's 
             broken.
             >You break it, you fix it.
             
             Agreed. But you also mention the header/footer combinations in 
             the bb-look.html with explanation that if you want to tune the 
             look, these are the files. My point is that the mkbb.sh code does 
             not gracefully handle if someone does go in and liberally hacks 
             the headers and footers. The handling of the footers/headers is 
             just a little inconsistent. Sometimes the code handles it one 
             way, other times a different way. The dohostsvc.c file throws out 
             "nasty" messages about missing footer/header files but does close 
             off the html build properly. I guess where I am coming from is 
             consistent coding so if I know a particular area is causing 
             problems or needs changes, then I know logically that the same 
             treatment will be required in similar areas. I know I need to 
             address each header/footer file handler in both the C code and 
             the scripts as it may cause problems. The treatment required is 
             different. The reason why I brought this up is in part because I 
             can see where there may be a barrage of questions in the future 
             when skins are implemented and people do start playing with all 
             the
             easy-to-change html related components.
             
             >
             >The old version had it's charms.  However, it really sucked if
            > it was going to be used in a non-english location.  The "blue
             >buttons" aren't translation-friendly.
             
             The blue buttons are not that difficult to change. Way back, I 
             posted color info and procedure for creating new blue buttons 
             with whatever text you wanted. We created our own additional blue 
             buttons and wanted to match the original format. The new silver 
             icons are not that intuitive for people that are not 
             living/eating/breathing BB - pretty much everyone on the threads 
             can can give you chapter and verse which is fine - I am not 
             talking about this user base. I am not talking about the BB 
             wonks. We have constant turn over of operations staff and the old 
             format is a lot easier for them then the new format. When I 
             showed them the new format, these people were scratching their 
             heads when I explained the new silver icons (I am being polite 
             here...). So hacking the bb_header was a no-brainer for us. I 
             realize the drawbacks of having the huge blue buttons - they chew 
             up a lot of display real estate. Before the flames start up, 
             folks should remember that there are users out there that are 
             using a lot of monitor packages simultaneously and if you make BB 
             too "techno-cute", then the package will be less attractive. My 
             goal is to make sure BB is easier to use and is at least as 
             informative (if not more informative) then all the other non-BB 
             monitor packages we have to run. 
             
                The only thing I really had problems with the old display format

             was the background change over from the status color to black 
             across the screen. The coloration was nice and made it visually 
             distinctive compared to the other plain background non-BB 
             monitors. The problem was that the color change over would cause 
             poor visual differentiate of the table column and row names for 
             certain status color backgrounds - we are running our BB display 
             in a compressed horizontal window. We played around with the html 
             build logic trying to generate labels that were the color 
             opposite of the background staus color but the results were not 
             all that much better. To get around this we just tweaked the html 
             build code to ensure that the table fields would always have a 
             black background. The labels and status icons stand out very 
             nicely with nice contrast. We retain the color-change-over status 
             gif for the rest of the background. Also had to modify the 
             clear-status gif so it would properly display in our legend area 
             and correspond in appearance with it's appearance in the status 
             tables.
             
             
            >Ahhh... so the comments are truly based on having broken things.
            >Good to know.
             
             Wrong'o. It's no big deal to me because I go through the entire 
             release and hack it and test it before it is put into production. 
             I don't go over every single release because it is so time 
             intensive.....I cherry pick out of the new releases until it 
             becomes clear I have to buckle down and shift our base up to the 
             latest official release.  We did jumps from 102 to 104, job 
             change, 108 to 109 and now going to 130 (still have a lot to go
through) 
     Some of these comments are not based on my "breaking" the code but 
    in looking at the code and integrating in our widgets. I am looking for
trouble. I 
             am looking for where things have been reported by the threads as 
             having gotten out of hand. I am also looking at the code in terms 
             of where would it be confusing to the novice BB implementor. I 
             still see some of the same problems that have been brought up in 
             previous threads so I don't rehash them (knowingly at least...) 
             Some of these comments are to try and head off possible future 
             questions from others.  
               We also got all kinds of additional crap added on to handle 
             messaging for systems being taken offline, added monitoring to 
             our backups, HPweb-jetadmin integration, different manual paging 
             system for our operators blah blah blah...yawn yawn. Some of the 
             crap is generated from the threads about interesting ideas that 
             have not been implemented yet in the official release. The point 
             being we integrate a lot of crap into our version before it 
             appears in the official release. So when the ideas do get 
             integrated into the official release, we also have to go through 
             our code base and rip out or otherwise modify our code. 
             
             >Sorry for the delay in replying.
             
             No problem. I am sort of suprised my email made it out alive. Our 
             corporate mail server likes to play russian roulette with our 
             mail. Right now it has  developed a serious attitude.... A 
             significant percent never makes it out alive (a silver lining 
             from your perspective).
             
             

--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
To unsubscribe from this list, or to subscribe to the bb-digest list
send e-mail to mailto:majordomo@bb4.com with unsubscribe bb -and/or-
subscribe bb-digest in the BODY of the message.