Forum .LRN Q&A: Re: .LRN 2.0 RFC (update)

2: Re: .LRN 2.0 RFC (update) (response to 1)
Posted by Carl Robert Blesius on

Here is the updated list after feedback:

.LRN 2.0 (November 2003)


Weblog Package with Portlet (in)
Wimpy Point Package with Portlet (in)
Events (in)
News Aggregator (in)
Photo Album with Portlet (in)
Curriculum Package (in)


Batch user sync using IMS 1.1 (in)
Realtime user sync (in)
Workflow Support (in)
External Authentication -- LDAP+PAM (in)
Internationalization (i18n) (in)
noquote (substantially increased security) (in)
Themes cleanup (in)


.LRN 2.1 (Spring 2004)


Chat Integration (2.1)
Complex Survey (2.1)
Grade Book (2.1)
Course Registration Tool (2.1)
Research Enhancments (2.1)
Profiles (2.x) Can go into contrib. now (after talking to Al). Can someone from Sloan please do this?
Help Package / better documentation (2.x)


Themes support (2.1)
General Ratings (2.1)
General Categories Support (2.1)
Additional IMS and SCORM Support (2.x)
Additional Roles (2.x)
ACS-Subsite Review, Rewrite, and Integration(2.x)
New-Portal Review, Rewrite, and Integration (2.x)
Anonymous access for sections of courses or community (e.g. created content)(2.x)

3: Re: .LRN 2.0 RFC (update) (response to 2)
Posted by Matthias Melcher on
I think we should distinguish between
- 2.0 RFC (including movement of postponed packages from  2.0 to 2.1)
- 2.1 roadmap planning (including new modules).

The discussion about the totally new packages is not as urgent as 2.0, so I would not add these too early:

"Themes support (2.1)
Additional IMS and SCORM Support (2.x)
Additional Roles (2.x)
Anonymous access for sections of courses or community (e.g. created content)(2.x)"

4: Re: .LRN 2.0 RFC (update) (response to 3)
Posted by Carl Robert Blesius on

I had to survey developers and other involved parties to get an inventory of where things are.

2.0 is pretty much set (PhotoDB is the only thing I am not totally sure about... the portlet was written but nobody has used it).

Things labeled 2.1 are projects that already have momentum behind them, but are not yet ready for 2.0.

Anything that I labeled 2.x are projects that someone has mentioned wanting to do, but it is not clear *when* they will actually come into play.

All but the 2.0 objects are estimates Matthias. I am just trying to take the pulse of the community to inform (and help coordinate). As soon as we get 2.0 out we can start solidifying and modifying the roadmap.


P.S. I forgot important improvements that will be in 2.1: WebDAV and a needed overhaul of File-Storage UI (thanks to Musea and Sloan).