Hi Ruben,
On 16.01.2012, at 13:28, Rubén Pérez wrote:
> Can you think on a use case where we want somebody to be able to "drop" media
> packages in an inbox and get them processed without further intervention?
> Does it make sense for someone to have access to the inbox but not the UI, or
> to have access to the inbox so that the material they drop there is
> automatically processed without being previously revised?
I certainly can :-) Having the inbox functionality allows you to build very
simple clients that offer upload capabilities without the overhead or the need
to talk to the workflow service first, figure out which workflows are there,
offer that choice to the user etc. For example, you could add an inbox for
every department, using their own trailers and bumpers and publishing on their
youtube channel.
> I'm not saying it does not make sense, but, from my point of view, having a
> "reviewer" with access to the UI sending the videos dropped in the inbox to
> processing does sound like a good idea. It's a personal opinion, though,
> maybe there are adopters who are interested in that type of behaviour, but if
> they want to send a mediapackage directly to processing, they also have the
> REST services.
That's a valid opinion. Just configure the inbox with a workflow like this
("drop & hold for review"). I just don't see why there is a need to remove the
possibility to define a specific workflow. If you don't specify one, it will
use the default workflow anyway.
Tobias
_______________________________________________
Matterhorn mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.opencastproject.org/mailman/listinfo/matterhorn
To unsubscribe please email
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
