[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Phpgroupware-users] Summary of "TTS Request for comments" response
From: |
Dave Hall |
Subject: |
Re: [Phpgroupware-users] Summary of "TTS Request for comments" response |
Date: |
Mon, 15 Sep 2003 15:39:28 +1000 |
Drago Bokal <address@hidden> wrote:
> Hallo all,
>
> in the past week there came several comments in reply to my request,
> thank you for them all. They addressed several issues and in this
> emailI'll try to summarize them and reply to them.
>
> 1. Suggestions intimately related to the project
> It was suggested to use the UML for visualization instead of Petri
> Nets.As far as I understand, UML is just a language for describing
> models,and Petri nets can be described usig UML. Certainly the
> suggestion is
> interesting and will be addressed later, when visualization of
> Petri nets
> will be implemented.
> Another comment was to use TTS for various systems, not just bugs
> (such as computer and network problems, down to lihgt bulbs and up to
> inventory sales). Indeed, this is exactly the point. Using the
> suggestedupgrade it could be done by having several entry points
> into the Petri net,
> and later this will be done having several different Petri nets in
> the system.
>
> 2. TTS, Bugzilla, anthill and other systems
> We have been using anthill for a while and this also initiated the
> wholething. The initial idea was to port AH into PHPGW, and later I
> realizedthat Dave has started on it. I've obtained his code from
> the CVS and
> started to work on it, fixed some things and managed to finish the
> formfor displaying bugs. But then the TTS appeared again, and as in
> Anthillthere was lots of coding that was just the hardcoding of
> specific Petri
> Net into PHP I decided to cut it there and solve things in a more
> generalway using TTS. As I propose, the default Petri Net in TTS
> will be the one
> for Anthill, therefore it could be considered as a replacement.
>
> However, the users should be aware that the generalisation has its
> costsand also that the datamodel of TTS a subset of the datamodel
> of Anthill.
>
> If there is any interest in continuing the work on Anthill, contact
> me to
> send you the code I wrote, as I will abandon that and work on the TTS.
>
I would still be interested in having a look at the work which you did
on this. My work on Anthill has stalled due to some issues with my
client and their agent. I know Vincent (author of Anthill) is
interested seeing someone continue this work.
I think Anthill and a more general TTS have different target audiences
and I see no problem with phpGroupWare having both apps for potential
users to chose from.
> There were suggestions for using RT's API and some other systems were
> also mentioned: I am sorry to say but these things are beyond the
> scopeof the project. Thank you for the hint, however: if we find an
> use for
> that, then we'll try also to find time to implement those ideas.
>
> 3. Platform issues and paralel developement of the TTS
>
> I intend to post the finished project on both PHPGW and EGW CVS
> repositories, if a team of some project has a problem with that,
> pleaselet me know.
I have no problem with you providing the code to both projects. For
phpGroupWare we have a process for obtaining cvs access. See
http://docs.phpgroupware.org/wiki/index.php?page=Project+Contributor+Requirements
for more info
I also think you will find that the 2 platforms are not 100% compatiable
and the gap is likely to widen very quickly. Now that 16RC1 is out we
will be working hard on porting apps to our xslt template engine - which
I noticed eGroupWare has dropped.
> I was also told that there is some parelel
> developementof TTS going on simultaneously: this makes me believe
> that the choice
> of TTS was the right one.
Yes, there are some people from pro business who have already started on
this work. I am sure they would be interested in working with you on this.
> In the past days I have developed the
> main part:
> the implementation of Petri Net in the TTS, and it required adding
> a new
> field to the ticket and modifying the new_ticket and view_ticket
> forms and
> the index as well. The rest of the project that I still intend to
> do deals
> with
> maintenace of the Petri Net itself and is independent from the rest
> of the job.
>
> I suggest two ways of merging the changes: first would be that one
> finishesthe upgrades and submits the new code to the CVS (together
> with all upgrading
> infrastructure) and then the other submits his code as an upgrade
> of the new
> code. I volunteer to be the second one, as inserting my code into
> any other's
> does not require much work.
>
> The second would be that we exchange the files and upgrading
> instructions and
> then produce a single new version of TTS. This would probably
> require a bit
> less
> coding effort, but more organization and interdependencies.
> However, it would
> connect us closer together (and eventually, we can even meet for a
> glass of
> beer :)
I can speak from experience, probiz are great hosts :)
>
> 4. Connecting TTS with other XGW applications
> Since using the GW I have observed that the applications and their
> data are
> in general
> poorly interconnected. Therefore we proposed a system called Pajek,
> that would
> implement the general relation infrastructure into the GW. The idea
> is that
> various GW
> applications produce sets of objects, one just has to define
> RELATIONS on
> those
> sets of objects. The system could be both integrated into the
> applications, or
> independent from them, so that apps themselves do not know about it.
> The prototype of this system will be ready by the end of october as
> well.
> Unfortunately the specifications of the system Pajek are currently
> only
> available
> in Slovenian: http://lp.fmf.uni-lj.si/~drago/Pajek_spec_00.pdf
> The english translation will be ready at least with the prototype
> of the
> system.
> Such system probably requires more integration with the API and
> therefore more
> work from the side of the dedicated GW develoeprs, therefore we
> wanted to have
> first a working prototype (and therefore a proof of the concept),
> and only
> then start
> communicating with the GW's community.
I would suggest that you translate this to english and post a link here.
This sounds like it will involve some discussion.
>
> 5. Extra features:
> There was a list of features suggested, which unfortunately reach
> beyond the
> scope of this project. Let me summarize them here, if someone finds
> motivationto implement them:
> * advanced handling of the user notifications
> * advanced ticket filtering
> * more sophisticated use of categories to categorize tickets
>
> I've integrated the comments into the new version of specifications,
> which is available on http://lp.fmf.uni-lj.si/~drago/tts-petri-ug.pdf
>
> Again, thank you all for your contributions, time and ideas suggested.
> If some new ones appear, they will be appreciated.
>
I look forward to seeing where this all leads.
Cheers
Dave Hall
dave.hall.vcf
Description: Card for <dave.hall@mbox.com.au>
- Re: [Phpgroupware-users] Summary of "TTS Request for comments" response,
Dave Hall <=