Hi Andrew, I hadn't thought the issues were getting confused, but I guess they might have been....
I agree that (1) is required and the sooner the better, and it has to function alongside (2). Your (3) highlights the confusion. I'm certainly not suggesting that model changes go through some test repository or anything at all like that. What I am trying to get across, is that until (1) and (2) are available models which illustrate new features implemented in the PMR should be put into a test repository so that feedback on the new features can be obtained before they are visible in the main public repository. This is assuming that the new features, like the PCEnv session link, would not be visible for models without the associated metadata and/or documentation. This is a non-ideal solution as the changes in the PMR are still affecting the primary live model repository with incomplete testing prior to their introduction, but in general the changes should be invisible to casual browsers until the models in the repository are updated with the new annotations. Does that in any way clarify what I was trying to say? David. Andrew Miller wrote: > [Please note: I moved this onto the cellml-discussion list because the > ABI team-cellml list is supposed to be for Auckland-local correspondence > such as discussions about meeting times, which are not of interest to > people outside Auckland]. > > David Nickerson wrote: >>>> I would also like to reiterate that the primary model repository on the >>>> live site is not a suitable place for this kind of testing. If the test >>>> server is not suitable, can we at least create a separate model >>>> repository (people can add one to their own home folders, right?) and >>>> use that for testing and feedback on these features. >>>> >>> Is Matt is working on this? There was some talk about Michael's >>> SiteTools at the last meeting being useful in this regard. >>> >> Regardless of the state of a properly set up test server, as I >> understand it there is nothing stopping anyone adding a model repository >> to their own home folder and putting modes in there. Links can then be >> sent out for discussion of the look and feel, etc, of these test models >> which illustrate some new feature before they are added to the live >> repository. While this is a less than ideal test situation it would be >> much more preferable to asking for feedback on models already entered >> into the live repository. >> > I think that there are several quite different issues getting confused here: > > 1) Changes to the actual Plone product (including skin changes) should > be tested elsewhere before they go up (to check that no existing > functionality is broken and the change has the effect that it is > intended to have). There is no option but to test this on a completely > separate Zope instance because code changes could affect any objects in > the Zope instance. I believe Tommy currently carries out this kind of > testing locally in an ad hoc fashion, but site_tools will eventually > automate the process. > > 2) It would also be useful to allow people to see the effects of code > changes to decide if they agree before the live site is updated. This > probably also requires a completely separate Zope instance. I believe > that the IT staff have been working on a server that will help with > items 1 and 2 on my list in conjunction with site_tools. > > 3) Submitting new models to the repository or making updates to these > models is intended to be eventually become a fairly decentralised > process, which certainly wouldn't require any sort of review except > within the community the model relates to (provided the general curation > rules about metadata and so on are followed). I don't think it makes > sense at all to have every submitted model and every change to the > models go into a 'test' repository, get approved via one of the CellML > mailing lists, and then go into the live repository. Instead, changes > should go into the live repository (with proper metadata describing the > model status), and any changes after this should be tracked by the > repository. If there are any different or interesting features in the > model, the author of the model could draw them to the attention of one > of the CellML lists. > > Unfortunately, a lot of the model documentation structure which would > ideally be generated by the Plone site currently resides in the > temporary documentation in CellML models or in manually created pages > (i.e. in the content, not the code), and so there is a blurring of the > line between these cases. However, unless James is going to be changing > something across all the models within a month or so, I think that case > 3 above probably still applies to such changes made through the model > repository. > > Best regards, > Andrew Miller > > _______________________________________________ > cellml-discussion mailing list > cellml-discussion@cellml.org > http://www.cellml.org/mailman/listinfo/cellml-discussion -- David Nickerson, PhD Research Fellow Division of Bioengineering Faculty of Engineering National University of Singapore Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ cellml-discussion mailing list cellml-discussion@cellml.org http://www.cellml.org/mailman/listinfo/cellml-discussion
