On 6 Aug, 2009, at 17:50 , Ash wrote: > On Aug 6, 5:01 am, Andrea Tomasini <[email protected]> > wrote: >> Thanks for the feedback we will improve the message, do you have some >> specific suggestions? > > A few, yes. Make it clear on the download site that the egg and the > source releases are different versions. For example, in the popup for > Unix right now, it just says 'Agilo for Python 2.6', whereas maybe it > should say 'Agilo PRO 1.0 RC2 for Python 2.6' vs. 'Agilo Open-Source > 0.8 Source' for the source download. Ok, we can make this more explicit...
> And while I understand the subscription model, which is I think is a > good one. I guess I'm a little lost in the 'what should I download' > department. Here's my situation: I work for a large firm, who may or > may not be able to be convinced to pony up for the subscription. (It's > cheap enough that I might be able to swing it.) If we do, and get the > extra features, that's cool. But if we don't, what I really want/need > is to be able to have the 'PRO' binaries readily downgrade to the free > version if I don't license it or if the license expires. This avoids > the risk involved in later trying to swap out the plugin for a > different version that may or may not be 100% compatable with what > will be, by then, a large queue of tickets/stores/etc. Well the idea is that being Agilo Pro basically a subscription service, you can just disable it and you will have a plain Agilo Open Source, in fact the sources are inside the package. This will look exactly has the latest Agilo Open Source, to do so just remove from the trac.ini component section the following: [components] agilo_common.* = enabled => change it to disabled agilo_pro.* = enabled => change it to disabled Than you won't see any sign of the pro anymore... > And from your point of view, I would assume it easier to just maintain > a single code base that is both free and pro, with simple toggles on > some features that only enable when the license is current and valid. > > So, is an unlicensed 'pro' == free? (It seems like it is, as the > whiteboard isn't enabled.) Well are actually two completely different code bases, one is Open Source, the other is proprietary, for convenience (with some script-fu- python-banzai) we create a single binary egg for ease of distribution, and of course to allow more people to try it out ;-) So unlicensed Pro, or also 30 days trial Pro is free... after that it will go back to normal Open Source Agilo, if you want to completely remove the whiteboard and the licensing from the Admin page, than do what I wrote above... and you will have a plain Open Source Agilo :-) >> The best way to "force" an >> upgrade is to just remove the agilo row from the system table, that >> should be enough to make Agilo think that it needs to install >> again :-) > > Doesn't work. sqlite dies on 'table already exists'. Same would happen > in PG I'm sure. Trying to make an existing table is an error in almost > all DBMS. I thought we had a try and catch there, but I am probably wrong... :-) >> Well there are, so if you do not see them, is because something went >> wrong. There are predefined meta permissions called SCRUM_MASTER, >> PRODUCT_OWNER and TEAM_MEMBER which encapsulate a significant set of >> permissions just to get started. One can than tune and tweak those, >> by >> adding groups containing these permissions as basis. > > Ah, ok, there they are. I was looking for Groups, not meta > permissions. It's good security practice and helps save sanity if one > always grants permissions to named groups, and then only adds users to > the same named group. (I know that usual Trac says you can just grant > TRAC_ADMIN to people, but that's always made me just a bit > uncomfortable.) > > So, as a possible improvement on the existing meta-permissions, how > about if a new install starts with this: > Team (Group) -> TEAM_MEMBER (Permission) > ProductOwner (Group) -> PRODUCT_OWNER (Permission) > etc... This is what was made in Agilo 0.6, there was a product_owner group... the problems is that in this way we may incur in already existing groups and other stuffs, so the way we choose is to create new Permissions, and leave to the user the exercise to create groups with them :-) It is what we normally to also on customers installations, at least as a starting point... > So that, as you suggest, one can more easily tweak them over time. If > for example, I want to remove WIKI_EDIT from authenticated and grant > it only to team members and product owners, this is a LOT easier if > all users are currently setup as belonging to 'Team' (a group) instead > of having TEAM_MEMBER permission. In the former, I can simply add > 'WIKI_EDIT' to 'Team' and I'm done. In the latter I have to either > convert all users to now point to groups instead (a migration > nightmare), or find all users with TEAM_MEMBER and re-add WIKI_EDIT to > them (a maintence nightmare). Ah... so you are referring to the fact that the Team Admin panel allows to add members and stick to them the TEAM_MEMBER permission right? Good point, this we could figure out... We planned to rewrite the whole admin interface... and that would include a significant rework on the permissions and role side as well :-) I'll write some stories for this :-) >> The version number has been fixed, and it appears at the bottom of >> every page of Agilo. > > I have it on every page as 'unknown'. Is there a post-RC2 of PRO now > that fixes this? Yes, the latest version released yesterday, fixed this and many other issues ;-) >> I think this is what you already found out with python 2.6 and the >> double parameters right? > > Correct. It's a Python 2.6 issue, not a Ubuntu issue as previously > though (in other thread.) Ok, so we can still try to avoid this, by rewriting the urls as REST, and do not user GET parameters... >> What we could do is to rework out all the urls, and make sure they >> are >> more REST, which is what we tried to do with Agilo 0.8, but there is >> plenty of code to be migrated and checked ;-) Any help would be >> greatly appreciated :-) > > You either need to change a helper function somewhere to filter this > for you, or you'll need to fix the URLs. I posted two in the other > thread that have this bug, and I'm happy to post more as I find them. > (Is there a bug tracker somewhere I should be posting to?) > > http://example.com/trac/admin/agilo/teams/unassigned?team_member=username > > http://example.com/trac/agilo-backlog/Sprint%20Backlog?bscope=BacklogName&view=View Thanks, the bug tracker was open and is https://dev.agile42.com and is the one we use to develop Agilo, we had to close the anonymous ticket posting, cause we have been attacked many times by silly but filling up the whole database with crap :-( So post it here for now... Thanks ANdreaT --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Agilo for Scrum" group. This group is moderated by agile42 GmbH http://www.agile42.com and is focused in supporting Agilo for Scrum users. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/agilo?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
