[schooltool-dev] foo > manage or manage > foo ?

[Tom Hoffman]

On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 1:49 PM, Ignas Mikalajunas
<ignas.mikalajunas at gmail.com> wrote:
> >  Well... the idea is to arrive at the sprint knowing what we're going
>  >  to implement, so I'd rather talk about it now.  What's your thinking,
>  >  Paul?
>  >
>  >  --Tom
>
>  Oh, news to me. I kind of thought that we were not going to implement
>  full UI in sprint, and only discuss it, so Alan (from what I can
>  recall he wanted to do redo schooltool UI, as I didn't really want to
>  do that) would know where to go when he will do the UI work by
>  himself.

Apparently I need to do a better job of sending Ignas emails after
talking to Alan and Jeff here.  Regardless, we still have plenty of
time to figure this out.

What I don't want to do is spend time at the sprint talking about UI.
We've done that at what, three other sprints, without much to show for
it.  I want to be writing code.

>  Is it really feasible to decide upon the UI using email, and then
>  implement it fully during a quite busy week without some serious
>  consequences like a code a quality hit and work that will have to be
>  performed after the sprint? Especially keeping in mind CanDo
>  integration and schooltool instance that is used by Lyceum.

Whatever we work on, it should be a manageable and achievable within
the context of a sprint.  Perhaps we just need to define the scope of
the UI changes so that they are feasible given the time and people
we'll have on hand.  One reason to do UI here is that we'll have
interns available who should be able to wrangle page templates.

Maybe if we limit the scope of our ambition to rearranging the
navigation (add tabs, ditch breadcrumbs, ditch navigation menu)
without doing anything too complicated to the way each component works
(coming up with a system to register admin views) that would be more
reasonable.  Just get the basic tabbed paradigm into the trunk, even
if it isn't as completely implemented as we can imagine.

Anyhow, there's plenty of time to discuss it.

--Tom