On 27.03.2013 07:40, Peter Koželj wrote: > I was thinking about that but each one alone does not warrant 2 months > coding effort.
I meant split into two goals within one GSoC project. The thing is, I suspect that the WYSIWYG workflow editor might be just a bit too much for two months. So, it needs some infrastructure -- I expect the internal API will be table-based in any case -- and exposing that in the UI should be close to trivial, so that the project would have something to show relatively early. -- Brane > On 27 March 2013 07:30, Branko Čibej <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 27.03.2013 07:19, Peter Koželj wrote: >>> I hope I am not to late, I have added >>> https://issues.apache.org/bloodhound/ticket/490 to the list. >>> What do you think? >> Not bad, but I'd split it in two; the first step (required) would be a >> table-based workflow editor, modelled after Redmine's, for example. The >> second step (optional) would be the WSYWIG thing. >> >> -- Brane >> >> -- >> Branko Čibej >> Director of Subversion | WANdisco | www.wandisco.com >> >> -- Branko Čibej Director of Subversion | WANdisco | www.wandisco.com
