A step page for explaining and choosing production mode of IPT

[kbraak]

What feature would like to see being added to the IPT?

Cases are increasing that IPT admins set up and register resources only to find out
they all go to the dev registry. Obviously the "production use" checkbox and the "i"
box are not honoured. Migrating resources from the test IPT is a burden of data publishers,
which also means more maintenance tasks on the Registry, and risks of introducing inconsistency.
It's important to guide IPT admins to do it right when they install the IPT.

A possible solution is creating a new setup step page, with TWO options, hence "test
use" and "production use", and explain the difference of these 2 options on the same
page. So admins knows what exactly each mode does and subsequent maintenance tasks.
It's then too obvious to ignore the option and will avoid possible mis-registration
situations.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by bko@gbif.org on 2012-03-15 12:56:54

[kbraak]

Yes I agree this would go a long way to clarifying the importance of this selection
between test and production modes. We can aim to include this in the next release.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by kyle.braak on 2012-03-15 15:27:15

• Labels added: Milestone-Release2.0.4, Usability, Component-UI

[kbraak]

Changes made to setup page II in r3695 and r3696. Screenshot attached of final work.

At first I implemented a separate page, but in the end I decided on reworking the existing
setup page II in order to limit introducing new errors. 

Still needed, is internationalization (4 properties affected, 1 new, 2 updated, 1 deleted):

admin.config.setup2.mode (added)
admin.config.setup2.welcome (updated)
admin.config.setup2.production.help (updated)
admin.config.setup2.production (deleted)

The CSS has been tested in Safari, Firefox, and Chrome with no problems. 

Please let me know what you think of the change, and if it is enough to better guide
users during configuration.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by kyle.braak on 2012-03-18 20:28:17

---

• Attachment: Picture 5.png
  

[kbraak]

(No text was entered with this change)

Original issue reported on code.google.com by gtuco.btuco on 2012-03-20 16:53:55

• Labels added: UserManual

[kbraak]

I like the idea of making the selection for either test or production explicit. Concerning
the screenshot (picture 5.phg), I would even consider adding another line of text directly
above the selector that makes it clear that this decision cannot be revised later on
for a given installation ("Be aware that this selection is final and cannot be changed
later on" or similar). Apart from overlooking the choice completely at present, the
main misunderstanding seems to be that "I set it up for testing first, and when I am
done with that, I switch to production" - it needs to be clear that "switching to production"
will not be possible.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by ahahn@gbif.org on 2012-04-02 14:57:34

[kbraak]

The current text reads like explaining what are "test mode" and "production mode", which
is technically correct. However, with Andrea's comment. I would like to propose the
following to make the consequence of choosing mode more straight-forward to users,
including who are not necessary aware of the Registry:

Now we have:
Test mode is for testing (registrations will go into a test registry)
Production mode is NOT for testing (registrations go into the GBIF Registry)

I am proposing:
IPT mode decides whether or not the hosted data resource will appear on the <a href="http://data.gbif.org">GBIF
Data Portal</a>. Once chosen, it is not possible to switch.
Choose "Test" if you are evaluating IPT or running it in a training scenario. Registrations
of data will go into the "Test" GBIF Registry. Data will NOT be on the Data Portal.
Choose "Production" if this IPT will publish data formally for your organisation. Data
will be on the Data Portal.
We suggest IPT administrators at least try Test mode and understand the registration
process, and then reinstall IPT in Production mode for formal data publishing.

Well a bit of long, but given the fact we already have quite some data resources still
locked in the test registry, I think it worth to explain more clear on the interface.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by bko@gbif.org on 2012-06-03 19:55:39

[kbraak]

After a bit of discussion with Kyle, the fact that not all registered resources go to
the current portal. So the text could be:

IPT mode decides whether or not the hosted data resource will be indexed by GBIF. Once
chosen, it is not possible to switch.
Choose "Test" if you are evaluating IPT or running it in a training scenario. Registrations
of data will go into the "Test" GBIF Registry. Data will NOT be indexed.
Choose "Production" if this IPT will publish data formally for your organisation. Data
will be indexed.
We suggest IPT administrators at least try Test mode and understand the registration
process, and then reinstall IPT in Production mode for formal data publishing.

Although people might still ask what "being indexed" means? But at least this avoids
the fact that at least now checklist data doesn't appear in the current portal.

I think it's worth to have more text in this setup II page, and not in an info box,
as a chance to inform user about the difference of test or live registry. Otherwise
for now we don't have any public material to explain the difference. It  is kind of
too late that users only know this after resources are registered to the test registry
and are explained by us via email.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by bko@gbif.org on 2012-06-08 11:50:14

[kbraak]

(No text was entered with this change)

Original issue reported on code.google.com by kyle.braak on 2012-08-07 08:43:20

• Labels added: Priority-Critical

[kbraak]

(No text was entered with this change)

Original issue reported on code.google.com by kyle.braak on 2012-08-07 09:11:52

[kbraak]

I have completed a new version of the setup page taking the above suggestions into consideration.
Please take a look at the attached screenshot. The changes have been committed in r3927.
If there are no further amendments, I will close this issue.

The following terms all need to be added/updated across Spanish, French, and Chinese:

admin.config.setup2.welcome 
admin.config.setup2.administrator
admin.config.setup2.administrator.help
admin.config.setup2.mode 
admin.config.setup2.mode.title
admin.config.setup2.mode.help 
admin.config.setup2.mode.test 
admin.config.setup2.mode.production 

The following term may need to be deleted across the other languages:

admin.config.setup2.production (deleted)

Original issue reported on code.google.com by kyle.braak on 2012-08-08 09:23:31

---

• Attachment: Screen Shot 2012-08-08 at 10.54.22 AM.png
  

[kbraak]

Last change to english translation made in r3929. Translation into other languages can
now commence. 

Original issue reported on code.google.com by kyle.braak on 2012-08-08 12:28:23

[kbraak]

Spanish keys added in r3930. Final review still needed. 

Original issue reported on code.google.com by kyle.braak on 2012-08-08 13:49:46

[kbraak]

French keys added in r3932. Final review still needed.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by kyle.braak on 2012-08-08 14:43:57

[kbraak]

(No text was entered with this change)

Original issue reported on code.google.com by kyle.braak on 2012-08-08 15:15:43

[kbraak]

Final French translation added in r3935 - thanks Nicolas. 

Original issue reported on code.google.com by kyle.braak on 2012-08-09 08:23:02

[kbraak]

Spanish translation added in r3937  - thanks Laura and Dairo

Original issue reported on code.google.com by daniel.amariles88 on 2012-08-09 12:39:11

[kbraak]

Traditional Chinese translation reviewed and added in r3968.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by bko@gbif.org on 2012-08-23 06:44:38

[kbraak]

Fantastic. Thanks to the translators for the fine work. I'll now close this issue. 

Original issue reported on code.google.com by kyle.braak on 2012-08-24 10:20:35

• Labels added: Component-i18n

[kbraak]

Reopening. User manual change still needed.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by kyle.braak on 2012-09-20 00:13:23

[kbraak]

(No text was entered with this change)

Original issue reported on code.google.com by kyle.braak on 2012-09-20 00:14:33

[kbraak]

This issue was updated by revision r4135.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by kyle.braak on 2012-10-03 15:40:58

[kbraak]

All changes for this issue required for the User Manual have been committed in r4135.
Marking issue as fixed. Please don't forget to update Spanish User manual. 

Original issue reported on code.google.com by kyle.braak on 2012-10-04 10:50:46

[kbraak]

(No text was entered with this change)

Original issue reported on code.google.com by kyle.braak on 2012-10-08 18:53:01