Forum OpenACS Improvement Proposals (TIPs): Re: TIP #24: Maintaining the apm_service / apm_applicaiton distinction

Collapse
6: Re: TIP #24: Maintaining the apm_service / apm_applicaiton distinction (response to 1)
Posted by Peter Marklund on 10/07/03 05:07 PM
Ok, so there seems to be some terminology confusion here. I think there are at least two important issues to consider:

1) Which packages do we offer for installation for an admin. IMHO general-comments should not be offered even though it has user visible pages. It simply does not make sense stand-alone. Related to this is whether it makes sense for an admin to mount a package. Again, I don't think it ever makes sense for an admin to mount general-comments. Services tend to be auto-mounted and general-comments already auto-mounts.

2) Should a package show up as a link in user navigation (and as a tab in Lars's new subsite UI), i.e. does it have a user UI (as opposed to only an admin UI) that it makes sense for the user to navigate to? This may be the case for general-comments, although I'm not sure.

Both those two properties should I think be attributes of a package. My thinking was that apm_application would indicate 1). For 2) we would need a new attribute.

I think a full solution to this issue may be defered to after 5.0.

Collapse
7: Re: TIP #24: Maintaining the apm_service / apm_applicaiton distinction (response to 6)
Posted by Tilmann Singer on 10/12/03 11:30 PM
Another thing regarding the search package - I don't think it should be part of the core at all (initial-install-p is set t in the .info file). At least not as long as there is no oracle support with intermedia-driver.