HT/VT Application Project Description

When the Church has need of help from the technology community, we will post that need in this forum.
atticusewig
Member
Posts: 308
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 9:48 am

Postby atticusewig » Mon Jul 06, 2009 11:47 am

Brad O. wrote:Like I've said before, I'm really spent on this. I've done everything I could possibly do to make this work. If someone wants to develop an Email-only thick client for this purpose, they can feel free to do that. ReturnAndReport.org is up and running and retains the same unofficial status as YouthMaster.org, ymyw.org, etc... Those who want to put forth the effort to use it can do so. Those who want to think it is somehow any different than Youthmaster.org or ymyw.org, can take that stance.

Brad O.


I would agree that to go the e-mail-only route would definitely require a
specific email client for HT/VT. With so many different general email clients
adding the necessary encryption and parsing options would be too problematic for most wards and stakes.

I think that borrowing some of the concepts of revision control systems and peer-to-peer technologies, the "centralized" point of information may be distributed more evenly, although I imagine it would be quite difficult.

If someone were to want to develop such a client, what is the status
of RaR's source code ? Is is GPL (or BSD), where they could learn from it and adapt it to email client use, or is it private code ?

- Atticus Ewig

kennethjorgensen
Community Moderators
Posts: 422
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 12:29 am
Location: Alnwick, UK

Postby kennethjorgensen » Tue Jul 07, 2009 5:32 am

atticusewig wrote:If someone were to want to develop such a client, what is the status
of RaR's source code ? Is is GPL (or BSD), where they could learn from it and adapt it to email client use, or is it private code ?


Interesting question :-)

User avatar
brado426
Member
Posts: 314
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 9:50 pm
Location: Foothill Ranch, CA
Contact:

Postby brado426 » Tue Jul 07, 2009 7:10 am

dkjorgi wrote:Interesting question :-)


For security reasons, RAR.org is private code. However, if I thought it would be helpful in any way, I would look for a way to provide it to someone who would find it of any value. (ie: remove/change the confidential parts of the code relating to security).

In case you haven't been able to tell, I'm not at all interested in spending any time supporting this Email only idea. I think it would have a negative impact on Home/Visiting Teaching rather than a positive one. To put it bluntly, I don't want to be involved with it in any way. However, I honestly do not believe RAR.org's code would help at all. The architecture is way too different. Someone who wanted to persue this could always just sign up for an account on RAR.org and look for ways to reverse engineer all the features.

If someone needs any advice about or code from RAR.org that would save them a lot of time, they can feel free to contact me privately.

Brad O.

User avatar
daddy-o-p40
Member
Posts: 237
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2007 1:22 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Postby daddy-o-p40 » Tue Jul 07, 2009 8:48 am

In reading all of this it seems all of this could have been avoided if the Project Manager for this New Church Application (NCA) had simply signed up for and actually used RAR.

This would have given the project team a far better perspective. This way he could have conveyed more useful information to the Priesthood leaders deciding the course of this NCA.

Instead it is clear that this NCA is just trying to be just like the Home & Visiting Teaching interfaces already in MLS -- sort of an MLS Online approach.

It is a shame because a conference call with actual RAR users would have really helped refine this initial design further.
"What have I done for someone today?" Thomas Monson

User avatar
mkmurray
Senior Member
Posts: 3241
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 9:56 pm
Location: Utah
Contact:

Postby mkmurray » Tue Jul 07, 2009 9:12 am

daddy-o wrote:In reading all of this it seems all of this could have been avoided if the Project Manager for this New Church Application (NCA) had simply signed up for and actually used RAR.

This would have given the project team a far better perspective. This way he could have conveyed more useful information to the Priesthood leaders deciding the course of this NCA.

Instead it is clear that this NCA is just trying to be just like the Home & Visiting Teaching interfaces already in MLS -- sort of an MLS Online approach.

It is a shame because a conference call with actual RAR users would have really helped refine this initial design further.

I just don't think this is accurate. I have been watching the planning of the HT/VT Community App since the beginning and the initial write ups were a lot closer to RaR than they are now. That means there has been a course change away from RaR over time. I believe even Brad would agree with me that the initial planning of this Community App was closer to what he had in mind than it is now. It may not have been exactly what Brad envisioned for the Community project, but it was closer to RaR's feature set at that time. With that said, the focus of the Community App has since shifted because of deliberate decision making.

From personal observation, the focus and intention of the Community App switched when Church developers started meeting and presenting with Priesthood leadership. Apparently they do not feel comfortable doing any more than replicating to the web what is currently in MLS. That is certainly their decision to make.

From my observations, this is not a project management issue. I have taken this stance every time someone has insinuated that it was some particular Church employee's fault that this project is "off course." You responded to my last stance saying that I was presenting knowledge no else had (that priesthood leadership was involved and making the decisions). I really don't have any more insider information than anyone else. I have just been watching the wiki edits since the beginning.

Before your response to my last stance, I had posted before that priesthood leadership was making the decisions, so I was surprised that you were claiming to be unaware of such information. I think this is why I got all worked up, because it felt as though you were ignoring the facts that had been presented and blaming Church leadership.

I see that now you have shifted your statements from not being directed toward any priesthood leadership decision makers to some Church employee project manager who dropped the ball. I just do not think the evidence supports this theory.
Many questions are already answered on the LDSTech wiki. Check it out!

User avatar
daddy-o-p40
Member
Posts: 237
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2007 1:22 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Postby daddy-o-p40 » Tue Jul 07, 2009 10:11 am

mkmurray, talking to people about a book (or RAR in this case) is very different than reading the book. Let's ask Brad.

Brad, has the Project Manager (PM) ever signed up and used RAR?
"What have I done for someone today?" Thomas Monson

User avatar
mkmurray
Senior Member
Posts: 3241
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 9:56 pm
Location: Utah
Contact:

Postby mkmurray » Tue Jul 07, 2009 10:19 am

daddy-o wrote:Brad, has the Project Manager (PM) ever signed up and used RAR?

I know the point you are getting at. And I know the answer to this question.

All things considered, I think it may be best to just leave this particular talking point where it is. You and Brad have made your point that use of RaR itself could potentially provide a new-found perspective of the effectiveness of online reporting (among other features). I know Brad has been trying to make this point for quite a while, and honestly it may be too late at this point to see many heads turned among Church employees.

I'll have a frank discussion with Tom Welch and we'll see if some of Brad's concerns make it to the right people. I can't promise much more than that.
Many questions are already answered on the LDSTech wiki. Check it out!

User avatar
brado426
Member
Posts: 314
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 9:50 pm
Location: Foothill Ranch, CA
Contact:

Postby brado426 » Tue Jul 07, 2009 10:30 am

Guys, I'm serious.... I am finished talking about this or anything related to it here. If anyone wants to contact me privately to discuss anything, I'd be happy to talk to you.

Brad O.

russellhltn
Community Administrator
Posts: 26660
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: U.S.

Postby russellhltn » Tue Jul 07, 2009 11:06 am

In addition to mkmurray's comments, my understanding is that many of the restrictions that have come into the project have come from legal - based not on just concern but experience. That moves these features from cost/benefit to risk/benefit. In addition, it moves the subject beyond what the community can reasonably discuss.

Mkmurray's desire that the benefits get to the right person is shared by myself and is the limits of our ability/authority.
Have you searched the Help Center? Try doing a Google search and adding "site:churchofjesuschrist.org/help" to the search criteria.

So we can better help you, please edit your Profile to include your general location.

User avatar
daddy-o-p40
Member
Posts: 237
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2007 1:22 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Postby daddy-o-p40 » Tue Jul 07, 2009 11:36 am

I believe we have the same goal -- making the most productive use of time we have been granted to do the Lords work.

mkmurray, thanks for trying to elevate this.
"What have I done for someone today?" Thomas Monson


Return to “Development Help Wanted”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest