Is this implementation-customization testing still on the agenda? If so, any updates on what sort of testing you're looking for? cheers, Joe On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 4:47 PM, Patrick Schmitz <pschmitz@berkeley.edu> wrote: > (Take 2: bad fingers sent too soon.) > > To the current implementers: We need your help evaluating 1.8. A major > criterion for this release was making it easier to upgrade versions of > CSpace without having to recapitulate all your customizations in the various > templates, etc. Many of you have helped with use-cases, but we need to make > sure we got it right. > > We are getting very close to having a release candidate for 1.8, and we'd > like to have your input on whether we made real progress here and/or need to > do some more work. We will follow up, probably end of this week or early > next, and ask you to consider how we have moved things around. We hope that > your customizations would be easily handled as "overlays" on the > distribution files, but we need you to verify that this is true for the > pieces you have customized. > > At this point, please consider what you've been customizing, and be ready to > get us some feedback during our testing phase to help make 1.8 a real > improvement in this area. > > One more thing: we are finishing up work to support PostgreSQL as the > back-end DB system, This should provide some performance gains, and will > help us to scale better, handle GIS extensions, etc. This should not require > much work on your part, other than to ensure you have PostgreSQL installed. > It looks like either version 8.4 or 9.0 will both work, but we're still > testing. More information will come, but I wanted to give you a heads up so > you can anticipate this change as well. > > Thanks - Patrick > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk mailing list > Talk@lists.collectionspace.org > http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org > >

Yes, Joe, although I am not yet sure how to characterize what we need from you. We have done work on how html, CSS, labels for fields, and extensions to schemas (in services and in the app layer) are modeled. It is our hope that the new model will mean that you can now do customizations in a manner that lets you more easily get upgrades (new versions) of CSpace (i.e., requiring less patching and work to thread your changes into a new distribution). What we'd like is for you to review the new model in 1.8, consider how you've been doing customizations, and then comment on whether our changes will significantly simplify the process of upgrading versions. If you have further ideas for how to simplify this, we'd like to hear them. Aron, ChrisM, Yura: - What is the state of our documentation on the changes made in this area, in 1.8? - Do we have a list of the changes to simplify configuration and customization? - Do we need to rewrite documentation to provide best-practice guides? Thanks - Patrick > -----Original Message----- > From: joe.slag@gmail.com [mailto:joe.slag@gmail.com] On > Behalf Of Joe Slag > Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2011 9:41 AM > To: Patrick Schmitz > Cc: talk@lists.collectionspace.org > Subject: Re: [Talk] Acceptance criteria/evaluation of 1.8 > upgrade workflow, and PostgreSQL coming > > Is this implementation-customization testing still on the > agenda? If so, any updates on what sort of testing you're looking for? > > cheers, > Joe > > On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 4:47 PM, Patrick Schmitz > <pschmitz@berkeley.edu> wrote: > > (Take 2: bad fingers sent too soon.) > > > > To the current implementers: We need your help evaluating > 1.8. A major > > criterion for this release was making it easier to upgrade > versions of > > CSpace without having to recapitulate all your > customizations in the > > various templates, etc. Many of you have helped with > use-cases, but we > > need to make sure we got it right. > > > > We are getting very close to having a release candidate for > 1.8, and > > we'd like to have your input on whether we made real progress here > > and/or need to do some more work. We will follow up, > probably end of > > this week or early next, and ask you to consider how we have moved > > things around. We hope that your customizations would be easily > > handled as "overlays" on the distribution files, but we need you to > > verify that this is true for the pieces you have customized. > > > > At this point, please consider what you've been customizing, and be > > ready to get us some feedback during our testing phase to help make > > 1.8 a real improvement in this area. > > > > One more thing: we are finishing up work to support > PostgreSQL as the > > back-end DB system, This should provide some performance gains, and > > will help us to scale better, handle GIS extensions, etc. > This should > > not require much work on your part, other than to ensure > you have PostgreSQL installed. > > It looks like either version 8.4 or 9.0 will both work, but we're > > still testing. More information will come, but I wanted to > give you a > > heads up so you can anticipate this change as well. > > > > Thanks - Patrick > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Talk mailing list > > Talk@lists.collectionspace.org > > > http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectio > > nspace.org > > > > >

Thanks Joe S. and Patrick, we were wondering about this today as well at SMK. I guess I thought that there would be some test plans but, OK we'll wait for updated documentation. It would be helpful if the updates arrived this week... Angela (on behalf of Chris Pott and the SMK team) On Jun 21, 2011, at 12:48 PM, Patrick Schmitz wrote: > Yes, Joe, although I am not yet sure how to characterize what we need from > you. > > We have done work on how html, CSS, labels for fields, and extensions to > schemas (in services and in the app layer) are modeled. It is our hope that > the new model will mean that you can now do customizations in a manner that > lets you more easily get upgrades (new versions) of CSpace (i.e., requiring > less patching and work to thread your changes into a new distribution). > > What we'd like is for you to review the new model in 1.8, consider how > you've been doing customizations, and then comment on whether our changes > will significantly simplify the process of upgrading versions. If you have > further ideas for how to simplify this, we'd like to hear them. > > Aron, ChrisM, Yura: > - What is the state of our documentation on the changes made in this area, > in 1.8? > - Do we have a list of the changes to simplify configuration and > customization? > - Do we need to rewrite documentation to provide best-practice guides? > > Thanks - Patrick > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: joe.slag@gmail.com [mailto:joe.slag@gmail.com] On >> Behalf Of Joe Slag >> Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2011 9:41 AM >> To: Patrick Schmitz >> Cc: talk@lists.collectionspace.org >> Subject: Re: [Talk] Acceptance criteria/evaluation of 1.8 >> upgrade workflow, and PostgreSQL coming >> >> Is this implementation-customization testing still on the >> agenda? If so, any updates on what sort of testing you're looking for? >> >> cheers, >> Joe >> >> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 4:47 PM, Patrick Schmitz >> <pschmitz@berkeley.edu> wrote: >>> (Take 2: bad fingers sent too soon.) >>> >>> To the current implementers: We need your help evaluating >> 1.8. A major >>> criterion for this release was making it easier to upgrade >> versions of >>> CSpace without having to recapitulate all your >> customizations in the >>> various templates, etc. Many of you have helped with >> use-cases, but we >>> need to make sure we got it right. >>> >>> We are getting very close to having a release candidate for >> 1.8, and >>> we'd like to have your input on whether we made real progress here >>> and/or need to do some more work. We will follow up, >> probably end of >>> this week or early next, and ask you to consider how we have moved >>> things around. We hope that your customizations would be easily >>> handled as "overlays" on the distribution files, but we need you to >>> verify that this is true for the pieces you have customized. >>> >>> At this point, please consider what you've been customizing, and be >>> ready to get us some feedback during our testing phase to help make >>> 1.8 a real improvement in this area. >>> >>> One more thing: we are finishing up work to support >> PostgreSQL as the >>> back-end DB system, This should provide some performance gains, and >>> will help us to scale better, handle GIS extensions, etc. >> This should >>> not require much work on your part, other than to ensure >> you have PostgreSQL installed. >>> It looks like either version 8.4 or 9.0 will both work, but we're >>> still testing. More information will come, but I wanted to >> give you a >>> heads up so you can anticipate this change as well. >>> >>> Thanks - Patrick >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Talk mailing list >>> Talk@lists.collectionspace.org >>> >> http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectio >>> nspace.org >>> >>> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk mailing list > Talk@lists.collectionspace.org > http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org