On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 11:39, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Denis, > > On Aug 3, 2011, at 11:19 AM, Denis Gervalle wrote: > > > Hi Vincent, > > > > Why are you proposing 2 booleans ? Is there non-technical application > spaces > > ? > > Here's an example: The Scheduler space: > - it's a technical space (i.e. not shown to all users) > - it's an application space (i.e. shown in the Application Panel for > advanced users) > > A second example: The Blog space: > - it's a non technical space (i.e. shown to all users) > - it's an application space (i.e. shown to all in the Application Panel) > Another example: The Sandbox space: > - it's a non technical space (i.e. shown to all users) > - it's not an application space (i.e. not shown in the Application Panel > but shown in the Spaces list in the Dashboard - i.e. in the "Content" spaces > list) > > > Maybe a static list for qualifying spaces would be better and more > flexible, > > WDYT ? > > Or else, why not having a boolean for really hiding spaces, the true > > replacement of blacklistedspaces (there could be non-technical spaces > that > > admin want to hide anyway) and maybe a static list for qualifying them if > > you have identified this need? > > To do that you'd need two lists for hiding spaces: one for simple users and > one for advanced users. That's because both categories of users don't > necessarily match in term of needs. > > I'm fine to have 3 booleans for each space if you think we need to have > this use case (i.e. ability to not show spaces for advanced users - I'm > still unsure we want to do this though): > - is an application space? > - is hidden for simple users (replacing technical space idea)? > - is hidden for advanced users? > This is going worse IMHO. Finally we needs filtering spaces based on users and "types" of space. Reading this, I am more in favor of "typing" spaces (a single extensible static list), and compute the blacklistedspaces list based on these "types", as well as any other list of spaces you may imagine, like the list of application spaces. For the blacklistedspaces, computing the list in velocity is finally not so bad, and could be adapted depending on your use cases. "Typing" spaces would only helps doing it better. WDYT? Denis > What do others think? Do we need the ability to hide spaces for advanced > users? > > Thanks > -Vincent > > > Your idea seams to me interesting but will probably fall short or be > misused > > on the long term... > > > > Denis > > > > On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 19:05, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> Hi devs, > >> > >> I'd like to propose 2 small changes that should make a huge difference > for > >> our users. > >> > >> 1) Introduce the notion of technical spaces > >> > >> The idea is that in WebPreferences for a space we should have a boolean > >> property mentioning if the space is a technical space or not. > >> This will allow to: > >> * Remove the blacklistedspaces variable > >> * List only non technical spaces for simple users > >> > >> 2) Introduce the notion of Application spaces > >> > >> The idea is that in WebPreferences for a space we should have a boolean > >> property mentioning if the space is an application space or not. > >> This will allow to: > >> * Replace the Quick Links Panel with an Applications Panel listing all > >> spaces that are application spaces > >> * Only list Content spaces in the Spaces Gadget in the Dashboard > >> * Add the ability for extensions to declare new applications that > >> automatically appear in the Applications Panel > >> > >> I'd also like to suggest adding a global admin preferences to quickly > >> select all spaces that are application and/or technical spaces (imagine > a > >> list of all spaces with 2 checkboxes for each space listed). This makes > it > >> very easy for the admin to reconfigure what are application spaces (thus > >> showing in the app panel) and what spaces should be hidden for simple > users. > >> Of course modifying these would modify the WebPreferences of the said > >> spaces. > >> > >> In addition to make this autodiscoverable I'd suggest that for admins > the > >> Application Panel should have a link to this admin feature. Something > like > >> "Configure Applications...". > >> > >> WDYT? > >> > >> Thanks > >> -Vincent > >> > >> PS: I'm very excited about these 2 ideas since they're simple and IMO > will > >> make XE much easier to use and understand for people starting to use it. > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> devs mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Denis Gervalle > > SOFTEC sa - CEO > > eGuilde sarl - CTO > > _______________________________________________ > > devs mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs > > _______________________________________________ > devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs > -- Denis Gervalle SOFTEC sa - CEO eGuilde sarl - CTO _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
