I'd actually go one further and say: (1) We should update the manual to make clearer (like Mark suggests)
AND (2) We should work to ship 1.7 with a default embargo already setup (i.e. pre-configured) -- so that all you need to do is update input-forms.xml and uncomment the pre-configured embargo field(s). If an institution doesn't like the pre-configured version, they can always modify it to use different fields or have different values, etc. What do others think? Should a pre-configured version be in 1.7? It seems like this question keeps popping up over and over again in different forms (e.g. "how do I enable it?", "how does it work?", etc.) Might be best to make this easier for everyone with a pre-configured version -- and let them decide if they want to extend it or not. - Tim On 9/9/2010 10:10 AM, Mark H. Wood wrote: > I worked over the Javadoc in the embargo package, to improve my > understanding and (I hope) to fill in the overall process and > requirements a bit. Committed revision 5342. > > The new package comments might serve as an appropriate starting point for > expanding the manual in this area. > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > This SF.net Dev2Dev email is sponsored by: > > Show off your parallel programming skills. > Enter the Intel(R) Threading Challenge 2010. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-thread-sfd > > > > _______________________________________________ > DSpace-tech mailing list > DSpace-tech@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dspace-tech ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net Dev2Dev email is sponsored by: Show off your parallel programming skills. Enter the Intel(R) Threading Challenge 2010. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-thread-sfd _______________________________________________ DSpace-tech mailing list DSpace-tech@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dspace-tech
