I think your final option is an excellent suggestion and aligns with what Darren suggested as well. : o On the other hand, if the UI code (HTML, CSS, JavaScript, etc.) would have to be redone from scratch, then maybe we can create an interim UI that is also the first step in the evolution of the "BillF" UI, and pursue both goals with one action. P.S: I'm going to forward this to the esme-dev list, so that others can see your suggestions as well. The first VOTE mail was just sent to you when I intended to be sent to you and the common mailing list. D.
________________________________ From: Bill Fernandez [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wed 1/7/2009 17:19 To: Hirsch, Richard Cc: Bill Fernandez Subject: Re: [VOTE] Web UI options Dick-- I'm not knowledgeable enough about the project roadmap to be able to make a clear vote, but here are my thoughts. o I think good UIs for installing, administering and using ESME will be critical to the success of the project. I also think these will take quite awhile to develop, and will need to be matured in stages. o If the UI code associated with the Apache version works well enough for now, maybe we should leave it as is and spend our time on developing what we really need in the long-term for ESME success. o On the other hand if the UI code associated with the Apache version is not good enough to serve those who want to evaluate/use ESME as it is now, then maybe we should rush out an interim version that provides the minimum necessary functionality and usability. o If rushing out an interim version would be accomplished by tweaking the existing code, then that would be the fastest way to put the end-user UI in a state where it could last for awhile as we develop our long-term solution. o On the other hand, if the UI code (HTML, CSS, JavaScript, etc.) would have to be redone from scratch, then maybe we can create an interim UI that is also the first step in the evolution of the "BillF" UI, and pursue both goals with one action. Does that help? --Bill At 8:52 AM +0100 1/7/09, Hirsch, Richard wrote: Last night on the scrum call, we were discussing various options for the Web UI and I wanted to summarize what we were discussing and ask the community on what option we should follow. -Situation- We currently have a Web UI running at the main ESME server at <http://esme.us <http://esme.us/> >http://esme.us <http://esme.us/> . This version is very early iteration and has various issues associated with it. It is also based on the old core code based at the Google Code site. We now have a new new ESME core code base which is located at Apache. This version of the code at Apache is the most recent code base and includes a better split between UI and server code. The Apache version, however, currently doesn't have UI code in such maturity that we could use it to replace the existing Web site at esme.us. Bill has also created a description of a new ESME UI which probably depicts what the next UI is going to look like. This description is currently incomplete inasmuch as certain UI features are still not depicted. -Vote- The vote deals with the decision whether we want to build an intermediary Web-UI based on the existing Apache Core or whether we want to skip the intermediary Web UI and focus on the "BillF" UI? Choices (Please Vote!): * Create an intermediary UI * Skip the intermediary Web UI and concentrate on the "BillF" UI? Once the community makes a decision on this issue, we will define the associated tasks to support the decision. Dick -- ====================================================================== Bill Fernandez * User Interface Architect * Bill Fernandez Design (505) 346-3080 * [email protected] * http://billfernandez.com <http://billfernandez.com/> ======================================================================
