Re: [Planner Dev] Resource feedback


El mar, 18-04-2006 a las 23:20 -0400, Kurt Maute escribió:
> On Tue, 2006-04-18 at 11:25 +0200, Alvaro del Castillo wrote:
> > Hi Kurt!
> > 
> > El lun, 17-04-2006 a las 22:09 -0400, Kurt Maute escribió:
> > > Personally, I think the best solution for this whole issue is to create
> > > a web interface for stakeholders that communicates with the database
> > > rather than the xml files.  It would be a great way to handle both
> > > resource updates and stakeholder reporting, albeit a bit more work than
> > > what you're proposing here.
> > > 
> > 
> > Yes, maybe the right solution for this new step is to work with the
> > database backend. Currently we have some support for versions in the
> > database backend. 
> Jon Wilkins was working on the SQL code a few months back to provide
> MySQL (and other) database connectivity.  It would be great to get his
> updates in before proceeding.  Jon - could you send us a patch of what
> you've got so far?  I know you had a list of a few things you wanted to
> look at - wondering what's left.


> > Ok, so the way to follow will be to use libplanner, in C, Python or C#,
> > to implement a web interface that works against projects in database.
> > 
> > Now it is time to decide the web technology. Now I prefer to use C and
> > libplanner directly so this will guide us to program cgi's in C
> > language.
> Yeah, we definitely need to use libplanner so the calcs are consistent.
> If developing a web interface from scratch, I'd like to have a look at
> Ruby - since I understand its fairly easy to pick up, and very quick to
> get results.

Take in mind that we need to use libplanner for the web backend and we
don't have Ruby bindings for libplanner.

Python is a friendly web language.

And also with C# we can use Mono web APIs.

> I think it also might make sense, though, to consider an interface with
> opengroupware - since it has basic project and task handling
> capabilities and will interface with a variety of tools:

I have some experience with OGo in the past (evolution connector and
some other things). Currently we have planner->evolution->oGo
integration. But in a very basic level. To integrate planner and OGo we
should use the XML-RPC interface for OGo or maybe, the Zidestore
interface. But this sounds like a big project. I will prefer something
more easy to develop.

> Granted, it would not be able to replace the Planner database - its
> either not targeted at the same type of audience as we are, or is simply
> not there yet, but there might be the potential there to get task status
> feedback from Outlook, Evolution, and Web based users fairly quickly.

The Evolution integration is already in a good state. We can continue
working on it if there are interest.


-- Alvaro

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]