Bricolage vs Jabber

Hey everyone,

Here at SAPO, we just started REALLY using the bricolage
alert  
subsystem, and we were planning on doing some sort of jabber
 
integration, but as soon as we started looking down the
code, we  
realized there was already some work done. Any chance any of
you guys  
are involved? What's the state of this development? Need
some extra  
help?

If not before, wish you guys an excellent 2007, full with
stories,  
medias and templates of course! 
Cheers,
Pedro

On Dec 28, 2006, at 8:00 AM, Pedro Custódio wrote:

> Here at SAPO, we just started REALLY using the
bricolage alert  
> subsystem, and we were planning on doing some sort of
jabber  
> integration, but as soon as we started looking down the
code, we  
> realized there was already some work done. Any chance
any of you  
> guys are involved? What's the state of this
development? Need some  
> extra help?

That code is 5 years old. Have at it.

> If not before, wish you guys an excellent 2007, full
with stories,  
> medias and templates of course! 

To you, too!

Best,

David

Just wanted to get back to this briefly.  How do you handle
the start  
desk for workflows with a number of subsites?  When we build
our  
desks, we are giving them Create permission on a subsite
desk, but  
the default check in is to the "start" desk where
other subsites can  
see the stories.  We'd like to limit the potential for
subsite  
stories to get mixed together unless the user makes  a
conscious  
choice. Any suggestions?

On Jan 2, 2007, at 1:34 PM, Scott Lanning wrote:

> On Tue, 2 Jan 2007, David E. Wheeler wrote:
>> On Jan 2, 2007, at 10:01 AM, Matt Rolf wrote:
>>> Has anyone run into realistic limits on the
number of workflows  
>>> they've created?  We're looking at creating
roughly 400 (200  
>>> content, 200 media) workflows for our site and
just wanted to see  
>>> if anyone had experienced negative results with
these kinds of  
>>> numbers.
>>
>> IIRC, the WHO has around 200? WHOvians?
>
> Not that many workflows. We have 12 pairs of
story/media workflows
> (i.e. 24 workflows total) containing 527 desks.
> I can't imagine that 400 would be easy to deal with for
the admins,
> at least. Just having to set the permissions would be
hellish,
> unless you have a script for it. For normal users,
whose permissions
> are restricted, it might not be an issue, since you
wouldn't have
> all 400 workflows in the left nav. Dunno about
performance issues,
> though. Might impact displaying desks with lots of
assets on them...
> not sure what else.
>

Sounds like they should be separate workflows.

On Tue, 24 Apr 2007, Matt Rolf wrote:
> Just wanted to get back to this briefly.  How do you
handle the start desk 
> for workflows with a number of subsites?  When we build
our desks, we are 
> giving them Create permission on a subsite desk, but
the default check in is 
> to the "start" desk where other subsites can
see the stories.  We'd like to 
> limit the potential for subsite stories to get mixed
together unless the user 
> makes  a conscious choice. Any suggestions?
>
> On Jan 2, 2007, at 1:34 PM, Scott Lanning wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 2 Jan 2007, David E. Wheeler wrote:
>>> On Jan 2, 2007, at 10:01 AM, Matt Rolf wrote:
>>>> Has anyone run into realistic limits on the
number of workflows they've 
>>>> created?  We're looking at creating roughly
400 (200 content, 200 media) 
>>>> workflows for our site and just wanted to
see if anyone had experienced 
>>>> negative results with these kinds of
numbers.
>>> 
>>> IIRC, the WHO has around 200? WHOvians?
>> 
>> Not that many workflows. We have 12 pairs of
story/media workflows
>> (i.e. 24 workflows total) containing 527 desks.
>> I can't imagine that 400 would be easy to deal with
for the admins,
>> at least. Just having to set the permissions would
be hellish,
>> unless you have a script for it. For normal users,
whose permissions
>> are restricted, it might not be an issue, since you
wouldn't have
>> all 400 workflows in the left nav. Dunno about
performance issues,
>> though. Might impact displaying desks with lots of
assets on them...
>> not sure what else.
>> 
>