com.xrtk.core icon indicating copy to clipboard operation
com.xrtk.core copied to clipboard

Provide a way to view platform specific configurations in once place

Open StephenHodgson opened this issue 4 years ago • 12 comments

XRTK - Mixed Reality Toolkit Feature Request

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe

Users need a way to view all of the platform specific configurations in one place.

When platform level data provider configurations are changed from the default setting in the parent service level's configuration profile, then we should be properly supplying an "override" to that data provider with the setting.

The best example of this atm is the Spatial Awareness System and the WMR/Lumin data providers. There's global settings in the spatial awareness system that can be adjusted for all, then a per platform setting can also be supplied that will effectively override the global setting.

How would you classify your suggestion

  • Usability / Configuration
  • Architecture / Services

Acceptance Criteria

  • [ ] Developers can see per platform settings in one place.
  • [ ] Developers can set global settings for a service using it's configuration profile
  • [ ] Developers can set per platform settings using a data provider's configuration profile on the parent service.

StephenHodgson avatar Aug 16 '19 13:08 StephenHodgson

My main issue with setting "Per Service" platform level overrides, is that you are taking an already heavy configuration layout and making it far more complicated. Also if I want to look at the configuration for a single platform, I now have to hunt through each service to find the differences.

The approach in #290 is far simplier, by grouping each platforms config under a single header. They can still share configuration, but allows the developer to customise a "Set" of config for a platform.

SimonDarksideJ avatar Aug 19 '19 13:08 SimonDarksideJ

You are setting a custom config per platform, on the data provider level.

The top down approach means that each master configuration can me wildly different than the per platform configuration.

StephenHodgson avatar Aug 19 '19 14:08 StephenHodgson

I suppose it's simpler in the fact that you can easily see the changes, but it's more complex because of the vast differences you can have form one master configuration to another.

Where as the bottom up approach means that the platform is configured exactly as it should be and all the other settings are shared between all platform builds.

StephenHodgson avatar Aug 19 '19 14:08 StephenHodgson

Settings can still be shared between platforms, I would simply create folders for all my config. Putting the global (shared) config in one folder. Then creating platform variances only where I needed them

SimonDarksideJ avatar Aug 19 '19 14:08 SimonDarksideJ

Imho, it' simply a UX problem. But in reality we really need it to be this way from a arch standpoint.

We can easily make a window that shows just the specific platform settings.

StephenHodgson avatar Aug 19 '19 14:08 StephenHodgson

Putting the global (shared) config in one folder. Then creating platform variances only where I needed them

That's already the way it works

StephenHodgson avatar Aug 19 '19 14:08 StephenHodgson

Yes, except currently, there is no way to separate config per platform. Other than in the Data providers. It's not available for the core services, etc.

SimonDarksideJ avatar Aug 19 '19 14:08 SimonDarksideJ

Core system service profiles are the global shared config, and the data provider profiles are the per platform settings.

We just need a way to make this easier to access via UX updates.

StephenHodgson avatar Aug 19 '19 14:08 StephenHodgson

And make it more obvious that the data provider settings take precedent (even tho it may be the same options on the system level.

StephenHodgson avatar Aug 19 '19 14:08 StephenHodgson

TL;DR I don't wanna change the way the whole xrtk fundamentally works, when it's just a UX problem.

StephenHodgson avatar Aug 19 '19 14:08 StephenHodgson

Can you update the discussion in #290 and close this FR (since they are the same thing). Post your alternate proposal there.

SimonDarksideJ avatar Aug 19 '19 14:08 SimonDarksideJ

I just wanted to keep it clean by opening a new issue as an alt. Linked back here, just in case.

Is that okay?

StephenHodgson avatar Aug 19 '19 14:08 StephenHodgson