[Evergreen-acq] Fwd: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Project to move acquisitions to AngularJS

[Kathy Lussier]

Hi all,

I posted this message to the general list a few weeks ago for maximum 
visibility, but I'm forwarding it along to this list too to make sure 
all the acq folks have seen it. Feel free to add comments and 
suggestions to our Google doc!

Kathy



-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: 	[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Project to move acquisitions to AngularJS
Date: 	Fri, 27 Oct 2017 07:15:49 -0400
From: 	Kathy Lussier <klussier at masslnc.org>
Reply-To: 	Evergreen Discussion Group 
<open-ils-general at list.georgialibraries.org>
To: 	'Evergreen Discussion Group' 
<open-ils-general at list.georgialibraries.org>



Hi all,

I originally was going to post this to the acq list, but I decided to 
post here for maximum visibility.

Although the web client is officially available for production use in 
3.0, we still have many interfaces, built in Dojo, that were ported over 
as is. Moving these interfaces over helped us make the web client 
available to libraries sooner than we could have done otherwise, but I'm 
hoping we can keep momentum going and gradually move all of the Dojo 
interfaces over the Angular.

The MassLNC Evergreen Development Initiative partners would like to 
start this process with the acquisitions interfaces. Our development 
committee has agreed to commit some funding this fiscal year to moving 
acquisitions to Angular. We have three goals for this project:

- As was the case with the original web client project, we would be 
focusing on feature parity in Angular, except where noted below. 
Although there are several bugs that have been reported in acquisitions 
as well as requests for new features, this isn't a project to fix of all 
of our acquisitions issues.

- Having said that, we see a move to AngularJS as an opportunity to make 
some tweaks to the UI that will improve the use of acquisitions for our 
staff. By tweaks, I mean making some settings sticky that previously 
required constant adjustment; improve listing and paging of acq 
elements; adding fields to some displays; and tinkering with some search 
options. I'm aware that some of these UI tweaks may also require some 
backend tweaking, but we aren't looking to do any major backend changes 
under this goal.

- We also would like to improve sorting in the admin interfaces and add 
sorting for line items in the line item search results, selection list, 
PO, and invoice interfaces. Although it may seem as if sorting falls in 
the category of UI tweaks, based on previous discussions I've had with 
developers, this work will probably require enough backend work to push 
it out of the tweak category. Nevertheless, the call for sorting in 
these interfaces has been so strong over the years that we think it 
really needs to be done as part of the transition.

I've worked with the MassLNC development partners (C/W MARS, NOBLE, 
Bibliomation, Sitka, Georgia PINES, Evergreen Indiana and LARL/NWRL) to 
come up with draft requirements for this project. 
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lvf0MZaTgT4r59EU8WAnt2g60Q_MFKb9x8hUZZOa8Xw/edit?usp=sharing

The intent of the requirements document is not to describe all of the 
behavior of all acq interfaces. The underlying assumption is that we 
want feature parity in each interface. However, I do describe some 
existing behavior that I want to make sure does not get overlooked. Any 
new behavior is highlighted in the document in green, bold font.

At this time, we're looking for the following:

*Acquisitions folks *- if you have any feedback on these requirements, 
let us know. Anyone using the link to the Google doc can make comments 
or suggested edits on the document. However, please remember that we're 
trying to limit this project to UI tweaks, not major new functionality 
or redesigned interfaces.

*Developers *- If you see any 'UI tweaks' that really are features 
requiring extensive backend changes, please let us know. In particular, 
at the bottom of the document (III)(F)(3) we have some requested 
acquisitions search options that I was unsure about. Also, in the line 
items section where we request sorting (III)(A)(2), if there is a 
particular sort field that raises red flags for you for being able to 
sort it in a performant manner, let us know.

*Potential funders *- I anticipate this will be a large project, but, in 
order to get the web client to where it needs to be, we need to keep 
Angularizing these older interfaces. As was the case of with the initial 
web client project, we're going to need funding contributions from 
throughout the community to proceed with this project. We have not yet 
sought a quote for this work and, therefore, do not know what the cost 
will be. However, if your organization can commit funding to this 
project (we don't need a number yet), please contact me directly so that 
you can be part of the project from the outset.

Feel free to let me know if you have any questions!

Kathy

-- 
Kathy Lussier
Project Coordinator
Massachusetts Library Network Cooperative
(508) 343-0128
klussier at masslnc.org
Twitter:http://www.twitter.com/kmlussier

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.evergreen-ils.org/pipermail/evergreen-acq/attachments/20171108/281da9fb/attachment.html>