Re: [SMW-devel] SMW roadmap: how to get new items on it
Hi Markus, Jeroen So my proposal is to set up a form-based feature requesting system and to see how it goes. Has there been any progress on this? Stephan -- What You Don't Know About Data Connectivity CAN Hurt You This paper provides an overview of data connectivity, details its effect on application quality, and explores various alternative solutions. http://p.sf.net/sfu/progress-d2d ___ Semediawiki-devel mailing list Semediawiki-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/semediawiki-devel
Re: [SMW-devel] SMW roadmap: how to get new items on it
Hey, Has there been any progress on this? Neill Mitchell is going to set up his tool so we can try it out and make a decision on using it or not sometime soonish. Thanks for the effort Neill! Lydia, did you find out anything relevant to the SMW effort when looking into the same roadmap/feature tracking issues at Halo/SMW+? Cheers -- Jeroen De Dauw http://www.bn2vs.com Don't panic. Don't be evil. -- -- Colocation vs. Managed Hosting A question and answer guide to determining the best fit for your organization - today and in the future. http://p.sf.net/sfu/internap-sfd2d___ Semediawiki-devel mailing list Semediawiki-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/semediawiki-devel
Re: [SMW-devel] SMW roadmap: how to get new items on it
In reply to the original email and the suggestions that followed: (1) I agree that it would be good if users could easily specify feature requests, and if there was some way of finding out how much each of them is wanted. (2) This could also inspire new extension projects. Users may not know what fits into SMW or into any other extension, so it would be good to have a central mechanism for collecting ideas. (3) I agree that Bugzilla-like organization of information makes sense, but that Bugzilla is not fully suitable. Using some templates and forms, one could easily copy the Bugzilla structure without its restrictions. This has been done, e.g. by Ryan Lane in an SMW-based trouble ticket system. semantic-mediawiki.org would be a good place for this. (4) Such a setup would connect to our recent discussion about collecting interesting implementation tasks. Features are always more fun to implement than bug fixes, and a well-organised list of features could be a starting point for new contributors. (5) It is never easy to measure how important a feature is. We cannot expect such broad interest that we really get representative opinions for our whole community. But a wiki system could have links to user pages to record support. (6) The Roadmap is not immediately related to this. It is a list of things that someone wants to do, not of things that someone wants to be done. It is organised by extension (cf. (2)). The process of editing it is to talk to the maintainer of the respective extension. So my proposal is to set up a form-based feature requesting system and to see how it goes. One or two people are needed to create and maintain this system; please step forward. It does not need to be perfect initially. We may need only a few form fields: title, description, related extension (or unknown/new), maybe a list of related bug reports on Bugzilla, status of the request. Comments could be implemented with a subform (list of items; easy to delete accidentally) or on extra pages (pulled in with a query; cooler, but needs another add comment form that autogenerates a page name and links to the original request). The description should be collaboratively edited (i.e. not owned by the user who reported it), the comments should not. Could/should LiquidThreads be used for having comments below a page instead of on the talk page? To me it seems that this could be an exciting approach for many, especially smaller software projects, so we might actually set standards doing this. We can also directly link such facilities from SMWAdmin to get more users involved. Markus On 24/02/2011 19:29, Jeroen De Dauw wrote: Hey, Following the recent discussions about the roadmap, I'm asking myself if there is no need for a process to get new items on it. I have several idea's that I think would be nice to implement, but not maybe not everyone agrees they should be. I think ideally there should be some place to request features with something that allows the community to categorize these by demand. And then a mechanism to check if the features with high demand make sense to put on the roadmap, and find out where to best put them. Some people might think this is overkill since there is very little community involvement with these things right now, but I think this is in part caused by the current way of doing things itself. Right now I can either create a page somewhere with a list of stuff I want to have implemented, that no one will ever seriously look at, or just place things directly onto the roadmap. I'm not sure what would be a good approach here, but it's probably a good idea to have a look at how other communities are managing this. I'd be very interested in other peoples thoughts (and suggestions) on this. Cheers -- Jeroen De Dauw http://www.bn2vs.com Don't panic. Don't be evil. -- -- Free Software Download: Index, Search Analyze Logs and other IT data in Real-Time with Splunk. Collect, index and harness all the fast moving IT data generated by your applications, servers and devices whether physical, virtual or in the cloud. Deliver compliance at lower cost and gain new business insights. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-dev2dev ___ Semediawiki-devel mailing list Semediawiki-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/semediawiki-devel -- Free Software Download: Index, Search Analyze Logs and other IT data in Real-Time with Splunk. Collect, index and harness all the fast moving IT data generated by your applications, servers and devices whether physical, virtual or in the cloud. Deliver compliance at lower cost and gain new business insights. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-dev2dev
Re: [SMW-devel] SMW roadmap: how to get new items on it
Hi, I'd volunteer to help set up a SMW based trouble ticket system. I cannot promise to put in effort to constantly maintain it afterwards, but I can help set it up in the next one or two weeks. I already have an account on semantic-mediawiki.org, so I could actually get going pretty soon. Can you maybe install SemanticFormsInputs as it might be handy. Would it be possible for me to geht admin rights so I can delete or move a page if I need to? regards, Bernhard -- Mag. Bernhard Krabina KDZ - Zentrum für Verwaltungsforschung Centre for Public Administration Research Guglgasse 13, 1110 Wien Telefon: +43 1 8923492-27, Fax: +43 1 8923492-20 Mobil: +43 676 849579-27 mailto:krab...@kdz.or.at - http://www.kdz.or.at - Plattform Verwaltungskooperation: http://www.verwaltungskooperation.at - Open Government Data Konferenz 2011: http://www.ogd2011.at KDZ News: RISER erhält Datenschutz-Gütesiegel EuroPriSe http://bit.ly/h8m0pQ - Ursprüngliche Mail - In reply to the original email and the suggestions that followed: (1) I agree that it would be good if users could easily specify feature requests, and if there was some way of finding out how much each of them is wanted. (2) This could also inspire new extension projects. Users may not know what fits into SMW or into any other extension, so it would be good to have a central mechanism for collecting ideas. (3) I agree that Bugzilla-like organization of information makes sense, but that Bugzilla is not fully suitable. Using some templates and forms, one could easily copy the Bugzilla structure without its restrictions. This has been done, e.g. by Ryan Lane in an SMW-based trouble ticket system. semantic-mediawiki.org would be a good place for this. (4) Such a setup would connect to our recent discussion about collecting interesting implementation tasks. Features are always more fun to implement than bug fixes, and a well-organised list of features could be a starting point for new contributors. (5) It is never easy to measure how important a feature is. We cannot expect such broad interest that we really get representative opinions for our whole community. But a wiki system could have links to user pages to record support. (6) The Roadmap is not immediately related to this. It is a list of things that someone wants to do, not of things that someone wants to be done. It is organised by extension (cf. (2)). The process of editing it is to talk to the maintainer of the respective extension. So my proposal is to set up a form-based feature requesting system and to see how it goes. One or two people are needed to create and maintain this system; please step forward. It does not need to be perfect initially. We may need only a few form fields: title, description, related extension (or unknown/new), maybe a list of related bug reports on Bugzilla, status of the request. Comments could be implemented with a subform (list of items; easy to delete accidentally) or on extra pages (pulled in with a query; cooler, but needs another add comment form that autogenerates a page name and links to the original request). The description should be collaboratively edited (i.e. not owned by the user who reported it), the comments should not. Could/should LiquidThreads be used for having comments below a page instead of on the talk page? To me it seems that this could be an exciting approach for many, especially smaller software projects, so we might actually set standards doing this. We can also directly link such facilities from SMWAdmin to get more users involved. Markus On 24/02/2011 19:29, Jeroen De Dauw wrote: Hey, Following the recent discussions about the roadmap, I'm asking myself if there is no need for a process to get new items on it. I have several idea's that I think would be nice to implement, but not maybe not everyone agrees they should be. I think ideally there should be some place to request features with something that allows the community to categorize these by demand. And then a mechanism to check if the features with high demand make sense to put on the roadmap, and find out where to best put them. Some people might think this is overkill since there is very little community involvement with these things right now, but I think this is in part caused by the current way of doing things itself. Right now I can either create a page somewhere with a list of stuff I want to have implemented, that no one will ever seriously look at, or just place things directly onto the roadmap. I'm not sure what would be a good approach here, but it's probably a good idea to have a look at how other communities are managing this. I'd be very interested in other peoples thoughts (and suggestions) on this. Cheers -- Jeroen De Dauw http://www.bn2vs.com Don't panic. Don't be evil. --
Re: [SMW-devel] SMW roadmap: how to get new items on it
All this talk about using SMW and SF reminded me that smw.referata.comalready has such a thing, here: http://smw.referata.com/wiki/Category:Feature_requests http://smw.referata.com/wiki/Category:Feature_requestsThe data structure could probably be improved, though (one of the requests is Improve the feature request template on this site :) ), and it probably makes more sense on semantic-mediawiki.org. But I wanted to note it. (The same holds true for the Tips category, which I've been meaning to move over for probably more than a year now, but still haven't gotten around to... but that's another story.) Bernhard - you don't need administrator rights to move a page. You need them to delete a page, but until you get that privilege you can blank pages instead, which is functionally the same thing. -Yaron On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 4:15 AM, Krabina Bernhard krab...@kdz.or.at wrote: Hi, I'd volunteer to help set up a SMW based trouble ticket system. I cannot promise to put in effort to constantly maintain it afterwards, but I can help set it up in the next one or two weeks. I already have an account on semantic-mediawiki.org, so I could actually get going pretty soon. Can you maybe install SemanticFormsInputs as it might be handy. Would it be possible for me to geht admin rights so I can delete or move a page if I need to? regards, Bernhard -- Mag. Bernhard Krabina KDZ - Zentrum für Verwaltungsforschung Centre for Public Administration Research Guglgasse 13, 1110 Wien Telefon: +43 1 8923492-27, Fax: +43 1 8923492-20 Mobil: +43 676 849579-27 mailto:krab...@kdz.or.at - http://www.kdz.or.at - Plattform Verwaltungskooperation: http://www.verwaltungskooperation.at - Open Government Data Konferenz 2011: http://www.ogd2011.at KDZ News: RISER erhält Datenschutz-Gütesiegel EuroPriSe http://bit.ly/h8m0pQ - Ursprüngliche Mail - In reply to the original email and the suggestions that followed: (1) I agree that it would be good if users could easily specify feature requests, and if there was some way of finding out how much each of them is wanted. (2) This could also inspire new extension projects. Users may not know what fits into SMW or into any other extension, so it would be good to have a central mechanism for collecting ideas. (3) I agree that Bugzilla-like organization of information makes sense, but that Bugzilla is not fully suitable. Using some templates and forms, one could easily copy the Bugzilla structure without its restrictions. This has been done, e.g. by Ryan Lane in an SMW-based trouble ticket system. semantic-mediawiki.org would be a good place for this. (4) Such a setup would connect to our recent discussion about collecting interesting implementation tasks. Features are always more fun to implement than bug fixes, and a well-organised list of features could be a starting point for new contributors. (5) It is never easy to measure how important a feature is. We cannot expect such broad interest that we really get representative opinions for our whole community. But a wiki system could have links to user pages to record support. (6) The Roadmap is not immediately related to this. It is a list of things that someone wants to do, not of things that someone wants to be done. It is organised by extension (cf. (2)). The process of editing it is to talk to the maintainer of the respective extension. So my proposal is to set up a form-based feature requesting system and to see how it goes. One or two people are needed to create and maintain this system; please step forward. It does not need to be perfect initially. We may need only a few form fields: title, description, related extension (or unknown/new), maybe a list of related bug reports on Bugzilla, status of the request. Comments could be implemented with a subform (list of items; easy to delete accidentally) or on extra pages (pulled in with a query; cooler, but needs another add comment form that autogenerates a page name and links to the original request). The description should be collaboratively edited (i.e. not owned by the user who reported it), the comments should not. Could/should LiquidThreads be used for having comments below a page instead of on the talk page? To me it seems that this could be an exciting approach for many, especially smaller software projects, so we might actually set standards doing this. We can also directly link such facilities from SMWAdmin to get more users involved. Markus On 24/02/2011 19:29, Jeroen De Dauw wrote: Hey, Following the recent discussions about the roadmap, I'm asking myself if there is no need for a process to get new items on it. I have several idea's that I think would be nice to implement, but not maybe not everyone agrees they should be. I think ideally there should be some place to request
[SMW-devel] SMW roadmap: how to get new items on it
Hey, Following the recent discussions about the roadmap, I'm asking myself if there is no need for a process to get new items on it. I have several idea's that I think would be nice to implement, but not maybe not everyone agrees they should be. I think ideally there should be some place to request features with something that allows the community to categorize these by demand. And then a mechanism to check if the features with high demand make sense to put on the roadmap, and find out where to best put them. Some people might think this is overkill since there is very little community involvement with these things right now, but I think this is in part caused by the current way of doing things itself. Right now I can either create a page somewhere with a list of stuff I want to have implemented, that no one will ever seriously look at, or just place things directly onto the roadmap. I'm not sure what would be a good approach here, but it's probably a good idea to have a look at how other communities are managing this. I'd be very interested in other peoples thoughts (and suggestions) on this. Cheers -- Jeroen De Dauw http://www.bn2vs.com Don't panic. Don't be evil. -- -- Free Software Download: Index, Search Analyze Logs and other IT data in Real-Time with Splunk. Collect, index and harness all the fast moving IT data generated by your applications, servers and devices whether physical, virtual or in the cloud. Deliver compliance at lower cost and gain new business insights. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-dev2dev ___ Semediawiki-devel mailing list Semediawiki-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/semediawiki-devel
Re: [SMW-devel] SMW roadmap: how to get new items on it
Hi Jeroen, I'm not sure what would be a good approach here, but it's probably a good idea to have a look at how other communities are managing this. I'd be very interested in other peoples thoughts (and suggestions) on this. I am with you on this one. And it is definitely not an overkill, IMHO at least In fact I just recently started to build a little wiki (semantic, of course :) ) for myself [0] for exactly this purpose as I too have some ideas that need documentation and organization. I do not know if this would be a way forward for this (or any) community. The difference between the wiki and bugzilla or the mailing list probably is, that I can use it to develop the ideas, work them into real concepts, then query and sort them where on the mailing list something comes up, is discussed, opinion is heaped upon opinion and then everything just vanishes into the archives where it is then really painful to retrieve it, let alone get an overview about anything. Stephan [0] Nothing much in it yet, really just freshly installed, but here you are: http://wiki.foxtrott.de/ideas -- Free Software Download: Index, Search Analyze Logs and other IT data in Real-Time with Splunk. Collect, index and harness all the fast moving IT data generated by your applications, servers and devices whether physical, virtual or in the cloud. Deliver compliance at lower cost and gain new business insights. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-dev2dev ___ Semediawiki-devel mailing list Semediawiki-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/semediawiki-devel
Re: [SMW-devel] SMW roadmap: how to get new items on it
On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 20:29, Jeroen De Dauw jeroended...@gmail.com wrote: Hey, Following the recent discussions about the roadmap, I'm asking myself if there is no need for a process to get new items on it. I have several idea's that I think would be nice to implement, but not maybe not everyone agrees they should be. I think ideally there should be some place to request features with something that allows the community to categorize these by demand. And then a mechanism to check if the features with high demand make sense to put on the roadmap, and find out where to best put them. Some people might think this is overkill since there is very little community involvement with these things right now, but I think this is in part caused by the current way of doing things itself. Right now I can either create a page somewhere with a list of stuff I want to have implemented, that no one will ever seriously look at, or just place things directly onto the roadmap. I'm not sure what would be a good approach here, but it's probably a good idea to have a look at how other communities are managing this. I'd be very interested in other peoples thoughts (and suggestions) on this. Thanks for bringing this up, Jeroen. I completely agree. I'm working on this for Amarok and Halo for my thesis. Would be great to hear your feedback on what I have so far and see if it applicable for SMW. Should we have a short chat tomorrow? Cheers Lydia -- Lydia Pintscher ontoprise GmbH – know how to use Know-how - - - Halo Extension - Want to get involved? http://smwforum.ontoprise.com/development - - - An der RaumFabrik 29; 76227 Karlsruhe; Germany email: pintsc...@ontoprise.de, www: http://www.ontoprise.com Registered Office: Karlsruhe, Germany, HRB 109540 Managing Directors: Prof. Dr. Jürgen Angele, Hans-Peter Schnurr -- Free Software Download: Index, Search Analyze Logs and other IT data in Real-Time with Splunk. Collect, index and harness all the fast moving IT data generated by your applications, servers and devices whether physical, virtual or in the cloud. Deliver compliance at lower cost and gain new business insights. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-dev2dev ___ Semediawiki-devel mailing list Semediawiki-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/semediawiki-devel
