Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Sakai 2.3

See Also QA for 2.3 Release.

Tools Being Considered for Promotion

Initial information on tools being considered for status promotion for the 2.3 release was captured in SAK-6218, and individual comments have been copied to the appropriate discussion pages. Following the Discussion links below for each tool in order to participate in the decision on whether to promote the tool. Also, see Criteria for Provisional Status for addtional information on the requirements a tool needs to meet for Provisional Status.

If you are currently running one of the following tools in your Sakai implementation, you are strongly encouraged to add your perspective on its stability and readiness for promtion to the discussion.

Tool

Current Status

Proposed Status

Page for Discussion

Decision

Blogger

Contrib

Provisional

Discussion

Promoted to Provisional as of 12-Sep-2006.

Calendar Summary (Synoptic Calendar)

Provisional

Project

Discussion

Promoted to Project as of 18-Sep-2006.

LinkTool

Contrib

Provisional

Discussion

Promoted to Provisional as of 18-Sep-2006.

JForum

Contrib

Provisional

Discussion

Will be revisited for next release.

Mailtool

Contrib

Provisional

Discussion

19-Sep-2006 After further discussion and initial QA it was decided to keep Mailtool as contrib for the 2.3.0 release and re-evaluate it next time.

Podcast

Contrib

Provisional

Discussion

Promoted to Provisional as of 18-Sep-2006.

Roster

Provisional

Project

Discussion

Will be revisited for next release.

RWiki

Provisional

Project

Discussion

Promoted to Project as of 18-Sep-2006.

SiteStats

Contrib

Provisional

Discussion

Will be revisited for next release.

Tests & Quizzes (Samigo)

Provisional

Project

Discussion

Will be revisited for next release.

User Membership

Contrib

Provisional

Discussion

Will be revisited for next release.

  • No labels

6 Comments

  1. I really like the clarity that is being brought by this page. In addition to discussion I'd like to see how tools are lining up against the established criteria. So, some list from the Criteria for Provisional Status where I could go down and say, "Yes, yes, no, yes,..." If there isn't anyone designated to build these lists, shouldn't tool/application authors/contributors submit a page self-reporting on the criteria and then discussion could ensue?

    I did have a couple of questions:

    1. Will there also be a Criteria for Project Status? Provisional criteria are established, but will Project designation decisions left to discussion?

    2. Discussion on the individual tools is great, but how/who will make the call if there is no consensus? Is the rule of thumb "no-consensus-no-go" or will some person/group make the call?

    1. With regards to Question #1: A "Criteria for Project Status" document does not currently exist, only the one for Provisional Status. The general practice so far has to been to promote a tool to Project Status when a clear consensus mandates such.

    2. With regards to Question #2: If you're looking for a name here, then that would be Chuck; however, as I'm sure Chuck will agree, tools will only be promoted if there is a clear consensus to do so.

    3. I completely agree with Marc's comments here in that a) it's a great step forward to have these clearly listed like this and b) that it would be even better to have a link off to something showing how they're currently measuring up.

      I'd also like to see an avenue to encourage a tool up (i.e. the next step closer to project) from the user perspective. As I understand it most of this discussion is around how people feel the tool compares to the checklist(s) and thus close they are to being "technically ready". I'd also like to see somewhere that people can say "I've no idea how well it matches up to the criteria but I'd love the tool so please work on it!".

      After all, if we're asking people to put in the extra yards to get a tool across the line it'd be nice for them to know people out there are keen to use it.

      1. Matt, the intention is to get the document converted to a matrix soon, so keep your eye on this space.

        As for encouraging a tool's developers, please feel free to express your interest in a tool directly to that tool's development team. You'll find the leads listed for the various Contrib and Provisional Projects in the Directory of Software Development Project Teams.

      2. Okay, we ran out of time to complete the matrix for the 2.3 decision time-frame. It will be in place for 2.4.