I'm fine with the decision and consensus, but want to add one thing. I've met a fair number of users who have a difficult time managing multiple windows in an ongoing way (call them "the closers"). We obviously don't have any such folks responding to this thread, but I think we should be open to such feedback (should it come) and possibly reconsider this decision if necessary.
Dan Daniel Wells Library Programmer/Analyst Hekman Library, Calvin College 616.526.7133 From: open-ils-dev-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org [mailto:open-ils-dev-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org] On Behalf Of Bill Erickson Sent: Monday, April 07, 2014 1:20 PM To: Evergreen Discussion Group Cc: Evergreen Development Discussion List Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-DEV] [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] browser staff feedback request / integration Agreed on "fleshing out modules on a workflow-by-workflow basis as much as possible". This is one area where user testing early in the process can really pay off. So, I think it's safe to say we have a consensus on avoiding the XUL/mixed integration path entirely. From a development perspective, this is certainly a relief. -b -- Bill Erickson | Senior Software Developer | phone: 877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457) | email: ber...@esilibrary.com<mailto:ber...@esilibrary.com> | web: http://esilibrary.com | Equinox Software, Inc. / The Open Source Experts