The patterns are manually added to the DDR data by a human and checked into SVN (and released at regular intervals). The website just provides a way for the developer to see submissions from users, work on them, flag them, and close them out.
________________________________ From: gopal kris <[email protected]> To: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Sent: Saturday, April 5, 2014 1:47 PM Subject: Re: Better documentation. To understand, the website 1.needs to allow the users to enter the info of the make and user agent details. 2.developers will review the data and approve 3.then it gets added to ddr data. I can take this up. i would need some help on understanding the current approach to add ddr data and how it is stored. Regards magudi > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Reza [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Saturday, April 05, 2014 10:21 PM > To: venkata kiran surapaneni; [email protected] > Subject: Re: Better documentation. > > Website technology: sure, I agree. But its always best to use apache > technology :) Since the website will be centered on a client, you are going > to have to use .NET or Java. Since .NET requires Microsoft licenses, I > think that leaves us with Java... > > wire frames: No, I do not have any. Im thinking just some basic screens > and forms will do. > > SVN: > > .NET and java clients: > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/devicemap/trunk/devicemap/ > javascript browsermap client: > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/devicemap/trunk/browsermap/ > > OpenDDR data: > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/devicemap/trunk/data/ > > > So if someone wants to take a stab at the website, just announce what you > plan on doing here on the list so people are aware and can coordinate as > needed, and as always show progress. When you get a good prototype up and > running, we can review and then if all is good, migrate it into the project > and then discuss how we move everything further (ie roadmap). > > Thoughts? > > > ________________________________ > From: venkata kiran surapaneni <[email protected]> > To: [email protected]; Reza <[email protected]> > Sent: Saturday, April 5, 2014 12:34 PM > Subject: Re: Better documentation. > > > > Hi, > > I agree with the use cases proposed. I don't think the technology > used to create the website matters. It can be .net, Spring MVC or any > thing. I think the convenience of the developer who ever takes the > responsibility should be deciding factor for now. When the library is > released and is doing good, if required the website can be modified if > required. I don't think this website is complex. > > I think some one needs to create a wire-frame sketches on how the website > would look so that every one can have a look at them and provide the > feedback. It would make the life easier for who ever is implementing the > web site and reduce rework. > > While we are discussing the options to make this library more user > friendly, I think we need to look at the code bases also. The structure in > which they are committed to svn are confusing(partly make be due to lack of > documentation). If possible each component in this should have its own > repository. Is this some thing that can be considered ? > > > > Thanks, > --Kiran >
