[Building Sakai] [sakai2-tcc] Assignments 2

[May, Megan Marie]

To clarify, the comparison to Profile2 was not in regards to functional parity.     Concerns were raise about migration paths and drop in replacements - hurdles that I believe the community cleared with Profile 2.    Let's not muddle the different points I was responding to.

I want to be clear that I am not pushing A2 (were it a top priority, would have started long ago).   That said, I  believe that understanding/outlining the work for each option alongside  broad community input should be a part of the decision making process.   To that end, I'll work to update the GAPS, outline concerns and find out about usage for A2.

Megan

From: sakai-dev-bounces at collab.sakaiproject.org [mailto:sakai-dev-bounces at collab.sakaiproject.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Fish
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 5:01 AM
To: sakai-dev
Subject: Re: [Building Sakai] [sakai2-tcc] Assignments 2

I'm in agreement with Chuck in that the effort should be expended to mutate the current code rather than embrace yet more uncertainty. The XML stuff is a pain in the derriere and needs pulling out into proper relationships, but it can be done. The statefulness can be sorted.

The Profile2 precedent that Megan offered is a little bit off the mark. Functionally, A2 does not offer enough above A1 to justify it being a replacement. Profile2 in functionally vastly superior to the Profile tool and was a no brainer replacement; you can't compare the Profile and Assignments1 scenarios.

I also agree with Matt that RSF could be considered an issue: nobody outside of Sakai uses it.

Cheers,
Adrian.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://collab.sakaiproject.org/pipermail/sakai-dev/attachments/20130307/7cad40a3/attachment.html