I think @amelia has a timetable in mind. But yes, I can’t imagine it would be a big thing. A week.
Nermine won’t need to merge or fork codes til a second pass, so we have a little time (a couple of weeks after she gets going). She also hasn’t replied to me yet so fingers crossed that happens soon! I checked in with her at the beginning of the month and she was still on board.
And as if by magic she responded we are good to start.
@amelia and @alberto: The three features as discussed are ready to use since a few days, maybe you noticed already via Github or the OE software. In addition, I decided to let Daniel fix some of the more annoying issues in Open Ethnographer until the 600 EUR budget allocated above was used up. So in total, this is what we got for that budget:
#122 Allow Ethnographers to merge two codes. Allows normal users to merge their own codes only, and Discourse admin users to merge codes of different authors together. (That latter addition still has to be documented somewhere properly.)
#114 Implement annotation lists per code.
#123 Create a web interface to access annotations by author and by Discourse tag.
#108 Removing the non-working “Collections” UI elements.
Discourse admins can change code and annotation ownership. I’ll need that in the next days for example to assign proper ownership to the annotations Anu imported manually from the Drupal platform.
Invoice will follow shortly in FreeAgent, as usual.
Great, Matt and thanks @daniel. I did see the GitHub notification but was not sure that the new code had been deployed. I’ll test it…
For the discussion how the Discourse tags to mark Open Ethnographer projects should look like:
project-* tags were supposed to keep together content of our various client projects even after they finish and we sort in their content elsewhere. See the “Admin tasks for edgeryders.eu” manual at “Tags for project content”. The idea is that we will eventually have a nice list, for example on the “Company → Our Work” page, with links to the complete content of each project we did.
For that reason, all OpenCare content (including the one not meant for Open Ethnographer) should have the #project-opencare tag. And all content should only have one
project-* tag because it only belongs to one client project we do. So in this scheme it’s not possible to introduce
Proposal: I was thinking of introducing project-specific tag namespaces that can be used however people like (and give the assurance that mods and admins won’t mess with them). They would start with the project name as prefix, and anything afterwards. So @amelia could use
opencare-extracontent or similar to mark OpenCare content outside the OpenCare category that should be coded in Open Ethnographer. By including this in a tag group with
project-opencare as parent tag, it is also ensured that nobody can use this tag outside of OpenCare content.
If you agree, could you update your instructions above accordingly?
Your naming convention proposal is a bit unclear. It assumes that every ethnographic research project has to have a correspondent client project, but that’s not necessarily the case. For example, you could have a project called “Alberto’s thesis”, launched by a student called Alberto that approached us with a good idea and obtained access to the data.
So, I’d rather have a prefix for ethno projects, for example
Makes complete sense. Please go ahead with that