31 May
2018
31 May
'18
5:39 p.m.
Here is how the message, mentions and app notif could look like
http://design.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Proposal/UserMessageNotifications
I also would not put the messageSender macro in the Notifications area,
since it will crowd it.
For me, if we want messages we really need an Inbox in the User Profile,
but that's something for the future.
So, what I would do is create the events and the notifications displays,
but leave the send message macro as it is. It can be integrated in the page
by using the macro and activate it from Administration, but is not
something we would recommend in the current state.
Thanks,
Caty
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 6:34 PM, Guillaume Delhumeau <
guillaume.delhumeau(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
2018-05-31 17:24 GMT+02:00 Guillaume Delhumeau <
guillaume.delhumeau(a)xwiki.com>gt;:
I will just introduce a new isEnabled() method to the descriptor. Sorry for
the noise.
> 2018-05-31 16:42 GMT+02:00 Vincent
Massol <vincent(a)massol.net>et>:
>>
>>
>> > On 31 May 2018, at 16:23, Clément Aubin <aubincleme(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
>> >> > On 05/31/2018 03:18
PM, Vincent Massol wrote:
>> >> Hi Clement,
>> >>
>> >>> On 31 May 2018, at 14:56, Clément Aubin
<aubincleme(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
>> > I'm here
describing my own usage of collaborative platforms or social
>> > networks. If it wasn't supported before today, maybe we should think
>> > about it, because usually, people with only one friend to talk to are
>> > rare. Having multiple conversation is something that we should at
least
>> >>> - When
being in a wiki, I might end up staying 1, 2 hours or more on
>> the
>> >>> same page, either to edit it or to read it and refer to it from
time
>> to
>> >>> time. The messaging feature of the notification is interesting
here
if
>> > Yes, this is a
feature that is also nice to have for all kind of
>> > notification, however, this is what I mean by "shipping a half
finished
>> >>> All in all,
I'm very concerned that we try to ship a half finished
>> >>> feature that cannot be used for real collaboration and that still
>> takes
>> >>> some place in the UI ;
>> >>
>> >> Maybe there’s a misunderstanding: We’re not trying to develop a
>> messaging feature. This feature already exists and we’re not touching
this.
>> > Actually, I would
be interested to know the other reasons for
disabling
>> > So we're
putting back something that has been disabled by default
since
>> > Thanks,
>> > Clément
>> >> > [1]
https://markmail.org/message/pw6wtx2lkn72rupv
>> >> >> Thanks
>> >> -Vincent
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>>> Thanks for you time and have a great day,
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Guillaume
>>
>>
> --
> Guillaume Delhumeau (guillaume.delhumeau(a)xwiki.com)
> Research & Development Engineer at XWiki SAS
> Committer on the XWiki.org project
--
Guillaume Delhumeau (guillaume.delhumeau(a)xwiki.com)
Research & Development Engineer at XWiki SAS
Committer on the XWiki.org project
I see a problem. If the message stream is
disabled, the preferences
buttons about the messages are still displayed in the notification
settings...
The way it works is by fetching all components that match some the role
"RecordableEventDescriptor", but there is no conditional section to
decide
either or not the preference concerning the event
type should be
displayed.
> >>
> >> [snip]
> >>
> >>>>
> >>>> All others: if you have any recommendation or counter argument,
> please post
> >>>> it quickly :)
> >>>
> >>> I don't have a good knowledge of the "old" message stream
> >>> implementation, however, I'm concerned about the ability of the
> >>> notification system to act as a messaging center.
> >>>
> >>> - When working on multiple documents, I might end up talking with
> >>> multiple people at the same time. What would happen to the
> notification
> >>> center ? Would I have a composite event with all of my conversations
> in
> >>> it, or one composite notification per user I'm talking with, which
> would
> >>> probably fill most of the notification center ?
> >>
> >> This is not supported ATM (see http://extensions.xwiki.org/xw
> iki/bin/view/Extension/Message%20Stream%20Application/) so no issue
FTM.
>> You can only send messages to a given user, to a group or to everyone.>
>> >> I don’t see a problem to add this feature later on if we need it.
>> > > think about.
>
> Did I say we should not think about it?
>
> Also as I wrote you can send to a group and to everyone too so yes you
> can send to multiple people.
>
> > Also, as you mentioned it in the end of your previous mail, "if we do
> > nothing now, nothing will happen for at least 1 year", what makes you
> > think that we'll have the time to improve the feature later on, even
if
> > we do need it ?
>
> Ok so we have a big disagreement:
> * You say “displaying notifications in the proposed way is bad thing and
> there’s no use case for it”
> * I say “‘displaying notifications for those who want to send messages
to
> a single person, to a group or to everyone is
better than not being
able to
>> do it”.
>>
>> Also note that it’s disabled by default ATM so by default you get what
>> you want, i.e. nothing!
>>
>> > >>> and only if we have the ability
to auto-refresh the notification
> center
> >>> every X seconds / minutes to check for new events or, in this case,
> new
> >>> messages. AFAIK, this feature isn't in place for now.
> >>
> >> I don’t see this related at all to messaging. You have the same
> problem for any kind of notifications. This is related to live
> notifications and something generic for the notifications feature.
> >>
> >> I don’t agree with "The messaging feature of the notification is
> interesting here if and only if we have the ability to auto-refresh the
> notification center every X seconds”. Again I don’t see why this is
related
> only to messaging and also I find it more
useful to have messaging than
> nothing (which is what you propose). I can imagine plenty of use cases
> where it’s still useful to have messaging without the auto refresh. I
> consider auto refresh to be a nice improvement to have not as a "must
have
>> or there’s no value”.
>> > > feature" : messaging is something
done in real time.
>
> Again we don’t agree about this. We’re not implementing a chat. We’re
> implementing message sending as in email sending. Live message sending
is
> another feature.
>
> > If you forget to
> > refresh your page, you forget to get new messages. Imagine if you had
to
> > refresh a page every time you wanted to
see a new message on IRC.
>
> This is exactly what you do with your email and I don’t think you can
say
>> that email is useless…
>>
>> > >>
> >> All that we’re doing is add the ability to display messages in the
> notification UI if some messages are present in the Event Stream table.
> >>
> >> This feature already exists today and not doing this would be to
> remove a feature that is now interesting to have thanks to the
replacement
> of the AS by the Notifications UI.
> >>
> >>> only to have an equivalent of a feature that we
> >>> disabled some years ago.
> >>
> >> We disabled it for 2 reasons and not for the reasons you mentioned
> above:
> >> * Because the dashboard was on the home page and several users were
> not using the message sending UI and didn’t want it to take valuable
space
>> on the home page. This has been solved by moving the dashboard to a
>> different space
>> >> * Because you couldn’t know when someone was sending a message to you
>> and it was hard to check your personal AS (you had to nav to your user
>> profile).
>> > > the Message Stream some time ago. In the
original message ([1]), this
> > was the only point mentionned, but maybe Nicolas had more reasons.
> >> Those 2 problems are fixed so there’s no reason to not have it
anymore.
> >>
> >>> If we want to promote messaging and more user
> >>> to user interaction in the wiki, maybe we should take more time to
> spec
> >>> it. If we had to vote for this, I'd say -0 for now.
> >>
> >> Yes and that’s why Caty is going to conduct a more general
> investigation on that.
> >>
> >> I understand your POV and I don’t disagree with it in general.
> However, I feel that:
> >> * I don’t like regressing/loosing features
> >> * This is an opportunity to have something now. I can tell you that
if
> we do nothing now, nothing will happen for at
least 1 year
> >> * We’re not redoing the messaging feature, just the display part in
> the notif UI
> >> * I don’t see how there would much changes even if we spend 2 years
> designing a new messaging center.
> >> * It’s not going to cost much (probably 1-2 days of work max). So at
> worse ,it’ll cost us 1-2 days if we had to redo everything.
> >> * Also note that we're not changing the store or anything so even if
> we redo it completely differently it doesn’t matter and we will not
loose
>> anything
>> >> * This will allow us to gather feedback from the community about
>> needs/improvements
>> >> * We can never implement a feature in one go. We need to work
>> iteratively. We just need to make sure the architecture is not going to
>> break. Since we’re not touching this part, there’s no real risk
>> >>
>> >> So I really believe that it’s more positive than negative to spend
>> this little time to display messages in the notif UI.
>> >>
>> >> WDYT?
>> > > more than one year without giving it
enough features to be usable for
a
> > standard user (things like being able to
get messages in real time,
for
> > example). For me, it's both a waste
of time, and this might even
degrade
> > the image of XWiki as it (IMO) won't
be a very useful feature.
>
> I disagree with you and I’ve already explained in details the reasons in
> a bullet point list.
>
> > I think that sending messages into the event stream was kind of a bad
> > idea from the beginning as messages don't have the same "weight"
as
> > other wiki events.
>
> The event stream has nothing to do with weight. It’s a timeline thing.
> It’s like saying: “having emails displayed in the order they are sent
is a
> bad idea”.
>
> The way even stream events are displayed is an implementation detail.
> They can be filtered, grouped, etc.
>
> > I do understand that you don't like loosing features,
> > but since I've known XWiki, I've never heared of the Message Stream
in a
> > good, useful and productive way.
>
> Then you shouldn’t care at all since it’s not going to be used and
you’re
> not the one implementing it. It’s also off by
default.
>
> So reading between the line, in the end you’re saying:
> * We shouldn’t have a messaging feature because what we need is a chat
> feature
> * There’s no way that people could use messages, it’s not useful
>
> What I’m saying:
> * We don't have chat feature and that’s a very large feature to develop
> with a completely different architecture.
> * A messaging feature is still interesting even if we have a chat
feature
> one day. Example use case: "send a
message to everyone that the xwiki
will
> be be upgraded tomorrow”, “ notify a group of
person to review a
document”,
> etc.
> * It costs little to be back to iso feature (1-2 days) and it’s taking
> almost the same amount of time just to discuss not doing it in this
thread
>> ;)
>> * I don’t see why messaging would be bad and affect the XWiki usage
>> negatively. Especially since message stream is off by default.
>>
>> Thanks
>> -Vincent
>>
>>