Hello,
I have uploaded a standalone version at http://publictest1.fedoraproject.org/beacon/php/
It would be very nice if you could test it out and give some feedback. I have not completed the testing yet and there are definitely bugs present. In this light I was hoping for a small issue management system that would allow users to post bugs related to this demo in one place. I would not start using it for important docs just yet. Until 17th I hope we can get a proper beta release out with feedback, etc. Some buttons may not work as am plugging in the functionality on the go.
Login requires you to enter your FAS account details.
Regards, Satya
On Thu, 2009-08-13 at 18:44 +0530, satya komaragiri wrote:
Hello,
I have uploaded a standalone version at http://publictest1.fedoraproject.org/beacon/php/
It would be very nice if you could test it out and give some feedback. I have not completed the testing yet and there are definitely bugs present. In this light I was hoping for a small issue management system that would allow users to post bugs related to this demo in one place. I would not start using it for important docs just yet. Until 17th I hope we can get a proper beta release out with feedback, etc. Some buttons may not work as am plugging in the functionality on the go.
Login requires you to enter your FAS account details.
Regards, Satya
Satya, Is the FAS login secured by SSL?
--Eric
Satya, Is the FAS login secured by SSL?
--Eric
No, it isn't. As publictest does not have SSL, Toshio helped me by changing the server being pointed to on publictest1 by editing /var/www/html/beacon/php/auth.php.
To test Beacon now, one needs to create an account on http://publictest3.fedoraproject.org/accounts/ and then use that test account to log into beacon on publictest1.
Regards, Satya
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 06:44:58PM +0530, satya komaragiri wrote:
Hello,
I have uploaded a standalone version at http://publictest1.fedoraproject.org/beacon/php/
It would be very nice if you could test it out and give some feedback. I have not completed the testing yet and there are definitely bugs present. In this light I was hoping for a small issue management system that would allow users to post bugs related to this demo in one place. I would not start using it for important docs just yet. Until 17th I hope we can get a proper beta release out with feedback, etc. Some buttons may not work as am plugging in the functionality on the go.
Login requires you to enter your FAS account details.
A usability note -- adding a new node is difficult in the left editor pane. The *concept* of adding a node is going to be foreign to the people who might otherwise use this editor. I would expect that if I am in the left editor pane, and I move to the end of an existing node and hit "Enter," a new node would be inserted of an appropriate kind, probably based on the context but falling back to some sane default like a <para>.
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 6:57 PM, Paul W. Frieldsstickster@gmail.com wrote:
A usability note -- adding a new node is difficult in the left editor pane. The *concept* of adding a node is going to be foreign to the people who might otherwise use this editor. I would expect that if I am in the left editor pane, and I move to the end of an existing node and hit "Enter," a new node would be inserted of an appropriate kind, probably based on the context but falling back to some sane default like a <para>.
I agree it is indeed more work to go to a list and choose a node than pressing "enter" but it is difficult to predict what the user wants the next section to be. Adding a fallback default is good idea but it will take more effort from the user to remove the default and choose a new one if our guess was wrong. At every point there is a list of possible nodes that can be added. The accordion on the right populates the list with only those options which are valid at that point. I am not sure how we can make it simpler and still keep it clean.
Regards, Satya
On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 3:13 PM, satya komaragirisatya.komaragiri@gmail.com wrote:
I agree it is indeed more work to go to a list and choose a node than pressing "enter" but it is difficult to predict what the user wants the next section to be. Adding a fallback default is good idea but it will take more effort from the user to remove the default and choose a new one if our guess was wrong. At every point there is a list of possible nodes that can be added. The accordion on the right populates the list with only those options which are valid at that point. I am not sure how we can make it simpler and still keep it clean.
I guess we are slowly reaching the stage where having a trac instance to keep track of defects and, feature requests comes in handy.
2009/8/14 sankarshan foss.mailinglists@gmail.com:
On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 3:13 PM, satya komaragirisatya.komaragiri@gmail.com wrote:
I agree it is indeed more work to go to a list and choose a node than pressing "enter" but it is difficult to predict what the user wants the next section to be. Adding a fallback default is good idea but it will take more effort from the user to remove the default and choose a new one if our guess was wrong. At every point there is a list of possible nodes that can be added. The accordion on the right populates the list with only those options which are valid at that point. I am not sure how we can make it simpler and still keep it clean.
I guess we are slowly reaching the stage where having a trac instance to keep track of defects and, feature requests comes in handy.
Do you mean the upstream trac instance?
-Yaakov
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 6:06 PM, Yaakov Nemoyloupgaroublond@gmail.com wrote:
Do you mean the upstream trac instance?
:) Thanks for pointing that out. As long as there is a structured method to keep track of feature requests/bugs, it should serve this deployment/integration well.
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 7:23 PM, sankarshanfoss.mailinglists@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 6:06 PM, Yaakov Nemoyloupgaroublond@gmail.com wrote:
Do you mean the upstream trac instance?
:) Thanks for pointing that out. As long as there is a structured method to keep track of feature requests/bugs, it should serve this deployment/integration well.
I suggest not using that for now as its become home of spam and rarely used by anyone. We'll move beacon to its own homepage by next week (possibly beaconeditor.org). If until then it can be tracked manually on a wiki page it would be nice. Just a bit more time.
Thanks and Regards Nandeep