On Feb 6, 2008, at 12:13 PM, Dustin S. wrote: > I really like the svn sandbox idea. As for the mailing lists I am in > agreement with Jonathan; I think a general list is the best idea so > +1 for me on portlet-dev. I think an individual list for each > portlet is too fine grained. > > Johnathan makes a good point about setting a template or format for > child pages; it would be nice to have all portlet pages have the > same layout. I browsed through the current ones and I like the way > the FeedbackPortlet is organized: > http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/PLT/FeedbackPortlet > with the following sections: > Purpose > Design > Source Code > Implementation > Configuration > Installation > Issue Tracking > And maybe a screenshots section in addition to those.
In the short run, I think it's very feasible to just point to the FeedbackPortlet example, but leave pages freeform. I would expect that as the incubation process becomes more fleshed out (which should occur over the next month or so) that that's a reasonable step to tackle in that context. One thought -- I would propose, and our incubation thoughts to date included discussion of creating a separate contrib or sandbox repository. My main thought is to provide a clean delineation between supported or community code, and drops or developmental pieces. Jason -- Jason Shao Application Developer Rutgers University, Office of Instructional & Research Technology v. 732-445-8726 | f. 732-445-5539 | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://jay.shao.org -- You are currently subscribed to [email protected] as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/uportal-dev
