colin.clark at utoronto.ca
Wed Oct 14 20:03:22 UTC 2009
I agree with Jess. This is something we're going to have to do in a
step-by-step way based on priority. We'll start with the Builder, and
go from there.
But first, let's get Infusion and Engage out the door!
On 14-Oct-09, at 4:01 PM, Laurel A. Williams wrote:
> Hi Jess,
> I agree with you that it is a long term task. However, my biggest
> concern in terms of a code review would be for people to look a the
> use of the infusion components on the site. As I still feel like I'm
> a newbie at this stuff, and given the problems everyone had with the
> builder yesterday, seems to me that it would be smart to review my
> implementations of the UI Options page. I can't point to anything
> else right off the top of my head, but I suspect there are other
> issues related to the use of infusion that could be reviewed.
> Jess Mitchell wrote:
>> This is on the list Laurel -- I'm well aware of it. It's likely
>> something we'll achieve in stages. I think that the work we're
>> gearing up for in anticipation of MCN plus integrating the new
>> features from the Infusion release will get us there somewhat.
>> Unfortunately, I don't think this task will get done all at once.
>> Thanks for bringing it back up again.
>> On Oct 14, 2009, at 3:12 PM, Laurel A. Williams wrote:
>>> Hi Colin,
>>> Along with upgrading the production site, and the builder
>>> modifications, this might be a good time for someone (not me) to
>>> tackle a code review of the website: http://issues.fluidproject.org/browse/FLUID-2628
>>> We added that task when we completed the site re-design, so it is
>>> long overdue.
> fluid-work mailing list - fluid-work at fluidproject.org
> To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives,
> see http://fluidproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fluid-work
Technical Lead, Fluid Project
Adaptive Technology Resource Centre, University of Toronto
More information about the fluid-work