Re: [uportal-dev] where to document the uPortal 3 efforts in the wiki
I agree with the idea of renaming the current uPortal 3 (UPT) space to
Archived Portal Exploration and putting a relevant header on the space
explaining what the documentation is for in greater detail.
Documenting the current effort in the current uPortal space is good for
continuity but I'm not quite sure where to put the new documents and how
to ensure people understand that this is documentation for
in-development code. The immediate need is that I need to document the
new Maven build management system and helper Ant tasks but I don't want
to cause confusion for people looking for help with uPortal 2.6. Is just
putting a {note} at the top of each page good enough for now?
-Eric
Andrew Petro wrote:
Jason,
I almost wonder if we move the pages into an Archive section
of the uPortal space, and then delete the uPortal3 space.
-1
I think the most confusing thing we could do would be to put these
pages into the uPortal space. Confluence savvy users may understand
that Confluence is a tree and that since the trunk of the tree in
which these archived pages inhabit is Archive these pages don't
actually apply to the uPortal they're trying to work with, but many
users will be confused, having done a search in the uPortal space on
confluence, to come across pages that have little applicability.
A separate space named Archived portal exploration or the like might
be better -- maybe the root of your objection, Jason, was to the name
Sandbox as being insufficiently expressive of something that is frozen.
That separation of space is doing important work for clarity. One
good move might be to slap a header into the theme for that space
making it especially clear that what is documented is archived
explorations into a better portal, and not necessarily uPortal
itself. That way when users do naive Confluence searches and come
across these pages, they are more able to make sense of what they have
found.
On Sep 17, 2007, at 3:49 PM, Andrew Petro wrote:
I wonder if it would be clearer to re-name the entire current
uPortal 3 space to something like uPortal Sandbox
I think this is confusing. I think we need to make it clear that no
more work is going into the codebase, and Sandbox seems ambiguous. I
almost wonder if we move the pages into an Archive section of the
uPortal space, and then delete the uPortal3 space.
And then I wonder whether creating a new uPortal 3 wiki space is a
good idea, or if the uPortal 3 efforts should be undertaken in the
existing uPortal wiki space. The change the project has made in its
approach to uPortal 3 is to be more evolutionary. uPortal 3 *is*
uPortal 2, cleaned up quite a bit and with pointed improvements. So
maybe, just as the existing code evolves to become uPortal 3, the
existing wiki space evolves to become a wiki space that documents
uPortal, inclusive of uPortal 3.
+1 I think they key factor in our new strategy moving forward is that
the New uPortal 3 is uportal -- with a direct lineage to previous
efforts. Given that shift, I don't think a separate wiki space is
really appropriate -- I'd rather see a linear release progression.
Likewise, I don't think it will be necessary to have an entirely new
uPortal manual, more a matter of growing and enhancing the existing
uPortal manual wiki space to document the project as it grows and is
enhanced.
+1 again.
Jason
--
Jason Shao
Application Developer
Rutgers University, Office of Instructional Research Technology
v. 732-445-8726 | f. 732-445-5539 | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://jay.shao.org
--
You are currently subscribed to uportal-dev@lists.ja-sig.org as: [EMAIL
PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see
http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/uportal-dev
--
You are currently subscribed to uportal-dev@lists.ja-sig.org as: [EMAIL
PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see
http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/uportal-dev
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: [uportal-dev] where to document the uPortal 3 efforts in the wiki
Could we use a different color / theme for UPT? With some kind of dev logo?
Susan
-Original Message-
From: Andrew Petro [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subj: Re: [uportal-dev] where to document the uPortal 3 efforts in the wiki
Date: Tue Sep 18, 2007 12:18 pm
Size: 8K
To: uportal-dev@lists.ja-sig.org
Eric,
Is just putting a {note} at the top of each page good enough for now?
Yes, I think.
While uPortal is gearing up to have this problem of what documentation applies
to what versions *more* with the present uP3 efforts, this is not a new problem
for uPortal. Cf. the way that the wiki documents PersonDirectory, with pages
attempting to explain how it works in the different versions and acknowledging
the change over time.
Andrew
I agree with the idea of renaming the current uPortal 3 (UPT) space to
Archived Portal Exploration and putting a relevant header on the space
explaining what the documentation is for in greater detail.
Documenting the current effort in the current uPortal space is good for
continuity but I'm not quite sure where to put the new documents and how to
ensure people understand that this is documentation for in-development code.
The immediate need is that I need to document the new Maven build management
system and helper Ant tasks but I don't want to cause confusion for people
looking for help with uPortal 2.6. Is just putting a {note} at the top of each
page good enough for now?
-Eric
Andrew Petro wrote: Jason,
I almost wonder if we move the pages into an Archive section
of the uPortal space, and then delete the uPortal3 space.
-1
I think the most confusing thing we could do would be to put these pages into
the uPortal space. Confluence savvy users may understand that Confluence is a
tree and that since the trunk of the tree in which these archived pages inhabit
is Archive these pages don't actually apply to the uPortal they're trying to
work with, but many users will be confused, having done a search in the uPortal
space on confluence, to come across pages that have little applicability.
A separate space named Archived portal exploration or the like might be
better -- maybe the root of your objection, Jason, was to the name Sandbox as
being insufficiently expressive of something that is frozen.
That separation of space is doing important work for clarity. One good move
might be to slap a header into the theme for that space making it especially
clear that what is documented is archived explorations into a better portal,
and not necessarily uPortal itself. That way when users do naive Confluence
searches and come across these pages, they are more able to make sense of what
they have found.
On Sep 17, 2007, at 3:49 PM, Andrew Petro wrote:
I wonder if it would be clearer to re-name the entire current uPortal 3
space to something like uPortal Sandbox
I think this is confusing. I think we need to make it clear that no more work
is going into the codebase, and Sandbox seems ambiguous. I almost wonder if we
move the pages into an Archive section of the uPortal space, and then delete
the uPortal3 space.
And then I wonder whether creating a new uPortal 3 wiki space is a good idea,
or if the uPortal 3 efforts should be undertaken in the existing uPortal wiki
space. The change the project has made in its approach to uPortal 3 is to be
more evolutionary. uPortal 3 *is* uPortal 2, cleaned up quite a bit and with
pointed improvements. So maybe, just as the existing code evolves to become
uPortal 3, the existing wiki space evolves to become a wiki space that
documents uPortal, inclusive of uPortal 3.
+1 I think they key factor in our new strategy moving forward is that the New
uPortal 3 is uportal -- with a direct lineage to previous efforts. Given that
shift, I don't think a separate wiki space is really appropriate -- I'd rather
see a linear release progression.
Likewise, I don't think it will be necessary to have an entirely new uPortal
manual, more a matter of growing and enhancing the existing uPortal manual wiki
space to document the project as it grows and is enhanced.
+1 again.
Jason
--
Jason Shao
Application Developer
Rutgers University,Office of Instructional Research Technology
v. 732-445-8726 | f. 732-445-5539 |[EMAIL PROTECTED]| http://jay.shao.org
-- You are currently subscribed to uportal-dev@lists.ja-sig.org as: [EMAIL
PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see
http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/uportal-dev
-- You are currently subscribed to uportal-dev@lists.ja-sig.org as: [EMAIL
PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see
http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/uportal-dev
-- You are currently subscribed to uportal-dev@lists.ja-sig.org as: [EMAIL
PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see
Re: [uportal-dev] where to document the uPortal 3 efforts in the wiki
That is possible. At this point I've renamed the space, added a note
that appears at the top of all pages and locked the space so that only
confluence administrators can edit it.
http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/UP3/Home
Unfortunately there is no way to change the key for the space that I can
see though I image some sort of export/import is possible to achieve
that goal?
As for a note on documentation related to the present effort would
something like the following suffice at the top of each page?
This documentation is for the uPortal 3 work being done on the trunk of
the uPortal framework. It does not pertain to uPortal 2.6 or any other
uPortal 2.X release.
-Eric
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Could we use a different color / theme for UPT? With some kind of dev logo?
Susan
-Original Message-
From: Andrew Petro [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subj: Re: [uportal-dev] where to document the uPortal 3 efforts in the wiki
Date: Tue Sep 18, 2007 12:18 pm
Size: 8K
To: uportal-dev@lists.ja-sig.org
Eric,
Is just putting a {note} at the top of each page good enough for now?
Yes, I think.
While uPortal is gearing up to have this problem of what documentation
applies to what versions *more* with the present uP3 efforts, this is not a
new problem for uPortal. Cf. the way that the wiki documents PersonDirectory,
with pages attempting to explain how it works in the different versions and
acknowledging the change over time.
Andrew
I agree with the idea of renaming the current uPortal 3 (UPT) space to
Archived Portal Exploration and putting a relevant header on the space
explaining what the documentation is for in greater detail.
Documenting the current effort in the current uPortal space is good for
continuity but I'm not quite sure where to put the new documents and how to
ensure people understand that this is documentation for in-development code.
The immediate need is that I need to document the new Maven build management
system and helper Ant tasks but I don't want to cause confusion for people
looking for help with uPortal 2.6. Is just putting a {note} at the top of
each page good enough for now?
-Eric
Andrew Petro wrote: Jason,
I almost wonder if we move the pages into an Archive section
of the uPortal space, and then delete the uPortal3 space.
-1
I think the most confusing thing we could do would be to put these pages
into the uPortal space. Confluence savvy users may understand that Confluence
is a tree and that since the trunk of the tree in which these archived pages
inhabit is Archive these pages don't actually apply to the uPortal they're
trying to work with, but many users will be confused, having done a search in
the uPortal space on confluence, to come across pages that have little
applicability.
A separate space named Archived portal exploration or the like might be
better -- maybe the root of your objection, Jason, was to the name Sandbox
as being insufficiently expressive of something that is frozen.
That separation of space is doing important work for clarity. One good move
might be to slap a header into the theme for that space making it especially
clear that what is documented is archived explorations into a better portal,
and not necessarily uPortal itself. That way when users do naive Confluence
searches and come across these pages, they are more able to make sense of
what they have found.
On Sep 17, 2007, at 3:49 PM, Andrew Petro wrote:
I wonder if it would be clearer to re-name the entire current uPortal 3
space to something like uPortal Sandbox
I think this is confusing. I think we need to make it clear that no more
work is going into the codebase, and Sandbox seems ambiguous. I almost wonder
if we move the pages into an Archive section of the uPortal space, and then
delete the uPortal3 space.
And then I wonder whether creating a new uPortal 3 wiki space is a good
idea, or if the uPortal 3 efforts should be undertaken in the existing
uPortal wiki space. The change the project has made in its approach to
uPortal 3 is to be more evolutionary. uPortal 3 *is* uPortal 2, cleaned up
quite a bit and with pointed improvements. So maybe, just as the existing
code evolves to become uPortal 3, the existing wiki space evolves to become a
wiki space that documents uPortal, inclusive of uPortal 3.
+1 I think they key factor in our new strategy moving forward is that the
New uPortal 3 is uportal -- with a direct lineage to previous efforts. Given
that shift, I don't think a separate wiki space is really appropriate -- I'd
rather see a linear release progression.
Likewise, I don't think it will be necessary to have an entirely new uPortal
manual, more a matter of growing and enhancing the existing uPortal manual
wiki space to document the project as it grows and is enhanced.
+1
