On Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 11:23:44AM +0100, Christian Boos wrote: > > Alec Thomas wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 12:08:11PM +1100, Dave Cole wrote: > > > >> We used to use the old workflow branch here for a project we are working > >> on as a joint venture with another company. The old workflow was not > >> able to do all that we wanted, so we have since implemented our desired > >> > > > > I'm not sure why this would be. Everything you describe below, except > > for the additional detail in the milestone view, is doable with a plugin > > for the old Workflow branch. Are you talking about limitations of the > > default configurability? The plugin system? > > Well, another reason is probably that the old WorkFlow branch is simply > ... old, and they want to use recent 0.10 or 0.11dev (as it seems to be
He did specifically say "old workflow was not able to do Y", which was what I was curious about. > the case). Is that branch still in the "don't touch" state? :-) No I don't think so. I've come to the realisation that I don't have the time to hack on something of the magnitude of WorkFlow :(. There are a few people interested in working on it though, including Dave, and some mention of doing WorkFlow code at the Trac PyCon sprint, so there seems to be no shortage of hands :). The first major hurdle IMO is merging ticket_view.html and ticket_new.html and removing the redundancy in web_ui.py. This is tedious work :\ Personally ,I'd like to get the security branch merged (separate mail forthcoming) then work on AdvancedSearch (pyndexter is coming along nicely). > If not, what could be quite easily done I think and would satisfy 80% of > the needs, would be to implement the trac.ini configurable part only. > Doing this by abstracting from the current code and > http://www.object-craft.com.au/~djc/trac0.11dev.patch shouldn't be that > hard. Hmm, well, maybe. The roadmap code seemed to be the only bit of the patch useful in the general case. The rest was very specific to Dave's workflow. > The rest could still be done later, of course. I'm all in favor of > "incremental" steps happening "for real" instead of big changes forever > postponed, as you haven't been the only one hit by this problem ;) Definitely agreed :\. You live and learn i guess. -- Evolution: Taking care of those too stupid to take care of themselves. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Trac Development" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/trac-dev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
