Forum .LRN Q&A: Re: .LRN as a distribution of OpenACS

Collapse
Posted by xx xx on
IMO,
- .LRN should be an openACS "Configuration". I don't like "Vertical application", because it needs a clear definition.
- I consider openACS core to be groupware
- .LRN would be groupware for schools/universities.

As I see it, a .LRN release would be an installation script, including:
- an upgrade script from the latest openACS (core) release (including new bugfixes)
- a subset of packages that .LRN considers "core".

.LRN is (will be) openACS' major real life example, which is extremely important for marketing.
IMVHO, openACS should adopt all groupware specific features from .LRN including the portal system (the latter probably optional) removing all code differences.
Shouldn't openACS be the "Infrastructure" of the dotLRN roadmap (https://openacs.org/projects/dotlrn/roadmap) ? Is there a reason it cannot be or should not be?

OCT would govern all groupware specific stuff.
.LRN TAB must govern specific .LRN needs in packages, groupware and bugfixing (since .WRK TAB may want different things one day...).