[Xerte-dev] Re: Players and alternative formats

Wed Nov 21 23:06:11 GMT 2012

Also, should we move to a more formal trunk way of working where the
branches are old releases?

On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 10:42 PM, Pat Lockley <
patrick.lockley at googlemail.com> wrote:

> I don't get the process here though and there is a lot of core I can't
> test - no ldap, no multiuser and sharing and so on. Could the sandbox
> switch to 1.9?
>
> Alternatively, I could commit into 1.8 as I suspect I've changed maybe 10
> files (if that)
>
> On 21 Nov 2012, at 22:32, Julian Tenney <Julian.Tenney at nottingham.ac.uk>
> wrote:
>
> > well, I think it will be for you to attempt to merge, and when you have
> code in files that have changed since you branched, it's going to be down
> to you to make sure your new code doesn't break anything that has changed
> since you branched. I don't think too much has - you can also get a log of
> each file so you can step through changes that have been mde to that file.
> I'm guessing that to ull this off, you'll have changed some core stuff, but
> I don't know how much. From our point ofview the only thing that has
> changed is the html5 stuff, and that is mostly client side. My own changes
> are client side, but might have fixed the odd PHP thing.
> >
> > Ron, Tom and David are the most likely to be able to comment on any PHP
> changes since 1.8 they have made.
> >
> > Probably worth trying at first into a dummy folder or something 'safe',
> just to see how things pan out?
> > ________________________________________
> > From: xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk [
> xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk] On Behalf Of Pat Lockley [
> patrick.lockley at googlemail.com]
> > Sent: 21 November 2012 17:47
> > To: For Xerte technical developers
> > Subject: [Xerte-dev] Re: Players and alternative formats
> >
> > i've never merged before........
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 4:42 PM, Julian Tenney <
> Julian.Tenney at nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:Julian.Tenney at nottingham.ac.uk>>
> wrote:
> > I don’t think so. LTI just lets you open a door into the application.
> >
> > I’d rather deal with this now, than later when it’s more complicated.
> >
> > Why not try merging, and see if it looks gribbly?
> >
> > From: xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:
> xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk> [mailto:
> xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:
> xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk>] On Behalf Of Pat Lockley
> > Sent: 21 November 2012 16:36
> >
> > To: For Xerte technical developers
> > Subject: [Xerte-dev] Re: Players and alternative formats
> >
> > Could do, and just leave out the new modules?
> >
> > The changes I discussed don't exist in 1.9 just yet - would later in
> week.
> >
> > I need to list what's changed for the purposes of testing, but am a bit
> worried that since the 1.9 branch was made a lot of new stuff has joined
> 1.8 (LTI for example) and I might undo some stuff? I can't see it clashing,
> but....
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Julian Tenney <
> Julian.Tenney at nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:Julian.Tenney at nottingham.ac.uk>>
> wrote:
> > Why don’t you merge in your mod stuff, it won’t make a lot of odds to
> most people, but will allow some cool stuff later… most people won’t see
> any difference, right?
> >
> >
> > From: xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:
> xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk> [mailto:
> xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:
> xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk>] On Behalf Of Pat Lockley
> > Sent: 21 November 2012 15:53
> >
> > To: For Xerte technical developers
> > Subject: [Xerte-dev] Re: Players and alternative formats
> >
> > i could, but is the php in 1.8 svn?
> >
> > It isn't a lot of php (an if statement or two)
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 3:16 PM, Julian Tenney <
> Julian.Tenney at nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:Julian.Tenney at nottingham.ac.uk>>
> wrote:
> > Could you do the php side? In the wizard we can add a parameter to the
> LO playback=”flash” which can be updated to playback=”html” for people who
> want to experiment with the beta.
> >
> > Then in the wizard we can do
> >
> > If (set as flash or undefined) //do it flash style
> >
> > Else
> >
> > //do it html5 style
> >
> > Appreciate the flash side is probably easier than the PHP side…
> >
> > From: xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:
> xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk> [mailto:
> xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:
> xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk>] On Behalf Of Pat Lockley
> > Sent: 21 November 2012 14:45
> >
> > To: For Xerte technical developers
> > Subject: [Xerte-dev] Re: Players and alternative formats
> >
> > -- Flash side --
> >
> > put a radio button in the editor
> > add an extra parameter to the url generation code (event handler for the
> play button)
> >
> > -- php side --
> >
> > Edit preview and play .php to check for this new $_GET and then branch
> >
> > -- .htaccess side --
> >
> > Mod the reg exp
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Julian Tenney <
> Julian.Tenney at nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:Julian.Tenney at nottingham.ac.uk>>
> wrote:
> > Time is of the essence for the 1.9 drop because we want to get that done
> by 30th November, so I like what you’re saying, but wonder if it can be
> done in time…?
> >
> > From: xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:
> xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk> [mailto:
> xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:
> xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk>] On Behalf Of Pat Lockley
> > Sent: 21 November 2012 13:29
> >
> > To: For Xerte technical developers
> > Subject: [Xerte-dev] Re: Players and alternative formats
> >
> > Well it depends on what we call "now"
> >
> >
> > It's a bit roadmappy, but for 1.9 you'd not have html_play.php and
> play.php, but one play.php which would then switch on the variable set
> (within the module folder).
> >
> > You'd have an option somewhere of setting "HTML5" somehow (perhaps a
> radio box on the editor?) which would then send a request to set this
> session to be "HTML5" and all previews from then on would be HTML5 mode.
> >
> > Then you add an extension to the current play rule in htaccess to
> support a "third" variable, so play_560_html would play the template in
> HTML5 mode. In the future, play_560_scorm would do the scorm export. As
> long as play_560_[a-z]+ was handled in the php play code for that module
> you could do whatever you wanted to do.
> >
> > In theory you could also have preview_560_html as well
> >
> > It seems neater to me, but this is me speaking from my cave.
> >
> > Oooh a flint.
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Julian Tenney <
> Julian.Tenney at nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:Julian.Tenney at nottingham.ac.uk>>
> wrote:
> > I like to generalise solutions too. What would the implications be for
> what we have now?
> >
> > From: xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:
> xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk> [mailto:
> xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:
> xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk>] On Behalf Of Pat Lockley
> > Sent: 21 November 2012 12:43
> > To: For Xerte technical developers
> > Subject: [Xerte-dev] Players and alternative formats
> >
> > Hello all,
> >
> > This is a message from deep inside modularisation caves so it might not
> apply to all.
> >
> > I have a semi working google maps making template, and when it "plays"
> at present it draws a map using the google maps API.
> >
> > However, the play could also generate a KML file for people to download,
> or if the map couldn't load it could provide the data in a different way.
> >
> > So then I thought this is effectively the HTML5 option (and you might
> argue the xml download, export, scorm are also "plays").
> >
> > So I was thinking that rather than using ctrl + click, or extra buttons,
> you could facilitate an extra request variable consistently across modules.
> >
> > Ergo you post a "HTML5" option at the URL and you get HTML5 back, you
> post a "XML" and get xml, or "JSON" and get json.
> >
> > This way the URL Library doesn't need to change all the time, or the
> .htaccess, but you also get different plays for each module (and they are
> all distinct).
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > Pat
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Xerte-dev mailing list
> > Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk
> >
> > http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/xerte-dev
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Xerte-dev mailing list
> > Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk
> >
> > http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/xerte-dev
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Xerte-dev mailing list
> > Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk
> >
> > http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/xerte-dev
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Xerte-dev mailing list
> > Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk
> >
> > http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/xerte-dev
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Xerte-dev mailing list
> > Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk
> >
> > http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/xerte-dev
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Xerte-dev mailing list
> > Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk
> > http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/xerte-dev
> > This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
> and may contain confidential information. If you have received this message
> in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.   Please do
> not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this message or in
> any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by the author of this
> email do not necessarily reflect the views of the University of Nottingham.
> >
> > This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
> attachment
> > may still contain software viruses which could damage your computer
> system:
> > you are advised to perform your own checks. Email communications with the
> > University of Nottingham may be monitored as permitted by UK legislation.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/pipermail/xerte-dev/attachments/20121121/e33693ef/attachment-0001.html>