[Sugar-devel] Journal --- Sugar-Developers meeting REMINDER (2 July, 2009 - 14.00 (UTC)) --- irc.freenode.net, #sugar-meeting

[Eben Eliason]

On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 10:42 AM, Gary C Martin<gary at garycmartin.com> wrote:
> On 2 Jul 2009, at 14:47, Eben Eliason wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 1:42 PM, Aleksey Lim<alsroot at member.fsf.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> But in that case we should provide possibility to mark objects that can
>>> be shared(I guess sharing all local objects by default is not a nice
>>> idea).
>>
>> Right. This would be essential. There's definitely some thought that
>> needs to be done here.
>>
>> Scott had an interesting proposal which basically exposed the Journal
>> (or some subset of it) as an RSS feed. This was really neat, because
>> it meant we could build a UI for someone else's Journal in Sugar,
>> populating it with that data, but also that these feeds could be
>> shared globally, for anyone with an RSS reader to benefit from. That's
>> a really powerful approach in my mind, and there is some starter code
>> lying around as a proof of concept already!
>
>
> +1 to rss feed concept, makes life a lot easier in a heterogeneous
> environment.
>
> I'm still catching up on email so apologies if this has been mentioned
> already. But the UI for marking of entries as sharable does not necessarily
> need to be another Journal user-interface addition** In the simplest
> approach you could just extend the Activity "Share with: my Neighbourhood"
> control to mark a Journal entry as part of the RRS feed. Would need some

The problem I see with this is that we're talking about two different
kinds of sharing. Just because I want to make a picture I drew
available for anyone to look at, or even make a "photocopy" of to
scribble on, doesn't mean that I want to let them into a shared
painting session so they can scribble on the original with me.

This is the difference between sharing an activity with someone
collaboratively, and sending them (a copy of) the resulting object.

> thought on wording, do you add more levels of sharing? Or do you just
> simplify the "Share with:" language language to "Private", "Share with:
> Anyone".
>
> **though I would like entries to visually show their sharing state, the
> buddy column hints at this but should be made explicit

I do actually think that the Journal is the best place to expose this,
especially since the way we plan to expose the feature in the UI is
something like "view <my friend>'s Journal." I'm not sure exactly how
or where that happens. Perhaps if we can abandon the checkbox for the
multi-selection we can use that space for a public/private toggle of
some kind.

Eben