Hi, I haven't read all your conversation, but I want to give my 2 cents. It would be great if the notification system of Trac would be improved - thank you for your effort to get it into Trac Core!
In our company a periodically sent report is an important feature (esp. for managers and project leaders). I have written a plugin for that: http://trac-hacks.org/wiki/MailPlugin. It would be great if you take a periodically sent report in consideration of the advanced notification (see also AnnouncerPlugin-ticket http://trac-hacks.org/ticket/8802). Best regards, Franz On Saturday, November 17, 2012 10:14:24 PM UTC+1, Peter Suter wrote: > > On 17.11.2012 21:09, Steffen Hoffmann wrote: > >> (15 months!?) > > > > Really? I didn't look it up by now. Amazing, how time passed by. > > Yes, I was surprised too. :) > > > Incompatible? Dunno, but I remember the sentence from the > > AnnouncerPlugin wiki page, that for moving from TracNotification to > > Announcer one may rename [notification] to [announcer] and go from > > there. So it was meant with some compatibility in mind, at least > > initially. I've not done a side-by-side feature and option comparison by > > now, although this may be required for success of the replacement > proposal. > > I meant incompatible as in you can't use them both and automatically get > the best of both worlds. (While TracNotification has not changed a lot > there have been a few additions that I think are not yet in Announcer > e.g. batch notifications.) I'm not sure if one could use both at the > same time (e.g. because you use one plugin that sends announcements and > one that sends core notifications.) > > >> But since this topic is coming up now, here's a short overview of my > idea: > >> ... > > Interesting approach. > > I've started writing up some more details as a proposal: > http://trac.edgewall.org/wiki/TracDev/Proposals/AdvancedNotification > > > So AnnouncerPlugin would be reduced to stuff, that lives in > > announcer/opt now. > > Basically, yes. I assume e.g. XMPP would stay in AnnouncerPlugin as > well. But even things like wiki notifications and html emails (while > really nice to have) would not be that important to transition into > core. The important thing would be that administrators can easily add > these features by installing AnnouncerPlugin without having to switch to > an entirely new system. > > > Certainly > > * multiple transport options > > * subscription model > > * flexible user preferences > > are the core of Announcer. > > Yes, and this core to me also seems quite mature. I really appreciate > that you want to bring the entire plugin into good shape. Just getting > the above into Trac seems almost too important to wait though. > > > Finally crypto functionality [...] > > [...] will remain in a plugin, because it's still far > > from common stuff and real-world applications rarely care for privacy > > and true confidentiality. > > Agree! I wondered if a new ICryptographyProvider extension point would > be needed for that, but using a decorator sounds like a good idea! > > > I'm not determined about the best approach for the aforementioned > > Announcer proposal yet. Actually I'm looking forward to reactions from > > other developers about their view and vision for bringing in Announcer > > features and more to Trac. > > Same here. Let's Cc trac-dev mailing list... > > -- > Peter > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Trac Development" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/trac-dev/-/63St74G-Vi8J. To post to this group, send email to trac-dev@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to trac-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/trac-dev?hl=en.
