 | | | | | | |
| |
|
Well, sort of. Here's more of the story:
I asked Dan Boger if he could help with developing the new automated Parts
Tracker. He's been working on it, as he's had time, for awhile now.
Unfortunately, he doesn't really have any time to put into it, real life
seems to be interfering.
He plans to continue working on the PT, when he can. But in the meantime,
he has posted what he's done so far, so other people can grab it, and take
it from where it is.
Once upon a time, I put together (in Visual Basic) a prototype for the PT.
You can grab a copy of this, or at least look at the various pages, at
<http://www.geocities.com/partsref/tracker/>. There wasn't much feedback
on the prototype, which means one of three things: (a) nobody looked at
it, (b) nobody understood it, (c) it's practically perfect in every way.
Some aspects of the design are pretty vague in the prototype. One example
of 'vague' is the update generator, the function that moves new parts from
'active' to 'official'.
Once you've seen what You can grab a tar'ed copy of Dan's work at
<http://www.peeron.com/tmp/>.
I have not yet looked at Dan's stuff, so I can't make many insightful
comments. I believe it's all in Perl, intended to run under Linux.
Dan mentioned that he is unable to provide server space or access.
He also mentioned in an email:
. I do think it's close to a point of a public beta -
. the only part still missing (and I may work on that
. tonight), is the part certification... and that shouldn't
. be terribly hard to do... the user interface/setup/modification
. should work now... of course, it all needs tons of testing.
If you want to help with this, great! Take a look, post reaction, ask
questions.
Steve
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Steve Bliss writes:
> Well, sort of. Here's more of the story:
>
> I asked Dan Boger if he could help with developing the new automated Parts
> Tracker. He's been working on it, as he's had time, for awhile now.
> Unfortunately, he doesn't really have any time to put into it, real life
> seems to be interfering.
>
> He plans to continue working on the PT, when he can. But in the meantime,
> he has posted what he's done so far, so other people can grab it, and take
> it from where it is.
>
> Once upon a time, I put together (in Visual Basic) a prototype for the PT.
> You can grab a copy of this, or at least look at the various pages, at
> <http://www.geocities.com/partsref/tracker/>. There wasn't much feedback
> on the prototype, which means one of three things: (a) nobody looked at
> it, (b) nobody understood it, (c) it's practically perfect in every way.
>
> Some aspects of the design are pretty vague in the prototype. One example
> of 'vague' is the update generator, the function that moves new parts from
> 'active' to 'official'.
>
> Once you've seen what You can grab a tar'ed copy of Dan's work at
> <http://www.peeron.com/tmp/>.
>
> I have not yet looked at Dan's stuff, so I can't make many insightful
> comments. I believe it's all in Perl, intended to run under Linux.
>
> Dan mentioned that he is unable to provide server space or access.
>
> He also mentioned in an email:
> . I do think it's close to a point of a public beta -
> . the only part still missing (and I may work on that
> . tonight), is the part certification... and that shouldn't
> . be terribly hard to do... the user interface/setup/modification
> . should work now... of course, it all needs tons of testing.
>
> If you want to help with this, great! Take a look, post reaction, ask
> questions.
>
> Steve
Email me with some things that need to be done and I let you know what I can do.
Paul
(I have been busy updating some of the parts I have receintly "finished"
also currently reworking the aquazone propellor)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.cad.dev, Paul Easter writes:
> In lugnet.cad.dev, Steve Bliss writes:
> > Parts Tracker Developers Wanted
> Email me with some things that need to be done and I let you know what I
> can do.
Right now, it's a monolithic project; there hasn't been any segmentation of
tasks. That's mostly my fault; I haven't reviewed the progress Dan has
made, so I can't say where there's a need for work. It's also an artifact
of not having a good design document. :(
Steve
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Steve Bliss <steve.bliss@home.com> writes:
> Well, sort of. Here's more of the story:
>
> I asked Dan Boger if he could help with developing the new automated Parts
> Tracker. He's been working on it, as he's had time, for awhile now.
> Unfortunately, he doesn't really have any time to put into it, real life
> seems to be interfering.
This "problem" seems to be quite familiar to a lot of us ;-)
> He plans to continue working on the PT, when he can. But in the meantime,
> he has posted what he's done so far, so other people can grab it, and take
> it from where it is.
>
> Once upon a time, I put together (in Visual Basic) a prototype for the PT.
> You can grab a copy of this, or at least look at the various pages, at
> <http://www.geocities.com/partsref/tracker/>. There wasn't much feedback
> on the prototype, which means one of three things: (a) nobody looked at
> it, (b) nobody understood it, (c) it's practically perfect in every way.
(d) I looked at it, but it was practically only GUI stuff
without the necessary functionality, and I'm not the right guy to
comment on GUIs...
> Some aspects of the design are pretty vague in the prototype. One example
> of 'vague' is the update generator, the function that moves new parts from
> 'active' to 'official'.
Yes, that would have been one of the more interesting parts
for me.
> Once you've seen what You can grab a tar'ed copy of Dan's work at
> <http://www.peeron.com/tmp/>.
Done, looking at it now...
> I have not yet looked at Dan's stuff, so I can't make many insightful
> comments. I believe it's all in Perl, intended to run under Linux.
>
> Dan mentioned that he is unable to provide server space or access.
>
> He also mentioned in an email:
> . I do think it's close to a point of a public beta -
> . the only part still missing (and I may work on that
> . tonight), is the part certification... and that shouldn't
> . be terribly hard to do... the user interface/setup/modification
> . should work now... of course, it all needs tons of testing.
>
> If you want to help with this, great! Take a look, post reaction, ask
> questions.
Well, I already volunteered for the Temporary Parts Tracker
from Tore Erikson, which I'll turn into a more automated solution.
I know that it would be too late with the "normal" Parts Tracker,
especially with the current running discussion, but I'd like to
stay in contact with whoever picks this project up.
I can't do it in good concience because I'll leave town
in a few days and will not be back for three weeks, and I don't
want to be the next blocking point... If the problem ist still
up for grabs at that point, I might reconsider.
Regards,
Hakan
--
"Any sufficiently advanced bug is indistinguishable from a feature"
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.cad.dev, Hakan Tandogan writes:
> (d) I looked at it, but it was practically only GUI stuff
> without the necessary functionality, and I'm not the right guy to
> comment on GUIs...
Actually, much of the functionality is in the prototype. The major missing
pieces are:
1. Unofficial/ad-hoc part downloading
2. Release packaging
3. Administrator override of author/reviewer functions (ie, the admin can
perform any function)
4. Email correspondence
To be more specific, the prototype handles the following features:
1. Creating logins
2. Updating logins
3. Requesting parts
4. Updating part requests
5. Submitting parts
6. Checking out parts
7. Checking in / certifying parts
8. Posting comments on parts
9. Updating submitted parts
I don't think there's any major piece I've omitted from these lists. If I
have, someone please point them out!
Steve
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
I got a question in email, and I thought the answer would be of general
interest.
The question:
> I'll need a primer on the current workflow - any pointers/urls I
> can concentrate on?
The answer:
In short, very loose form, the main workflow is:
Process 1: Author uploads file -> Reviewers check out file -> Reviewers
check/certify file
Process 2: Administrator packages update (which includes all files which are
currently unofficial and certified)
Process 3: Casual users view status list, download unofficial files.
Looking at page-to-page transfers / user navigation, most users will start at
the menu page, then jump to either the list of active files page or the 'my
parts' page. From one of these pages, they will act on the various files,
viewing, downloading, updating, checking out, etc.
Any page that requires the user to be logged in should request a login.
Steve
| | | | | | |
