@AagamShah97 @mitishasurana, I have open this PR with a draft of the upcoming 2.0.0 release we discussed with database features. The document draft for this SPD is in nanomfg/community in the gsaimage-2.0.0-planning-1 branch. The current area of focus should be 3.1 and 3.2. Careful attention to user requirements here will help us make sure we are able to implement all of the intended features.
W/r to 3.1 user classes, I think it would be useful more carefully define the user classes in terms of how they interact wit hthe system. the "community user" is a bit ambiguous. Some ideas:
users who upload individual SEM images with graphene
users who load images from the database, other interactions?
Also the "nanomfg user" class is a bit confusing. nanoHub user would make more sense, but techicaly all of our user access vai nanoHub, now...
@AagamShah97 @mitishasurana, I have open this PR with a draft of the upcoming 2.0.0 release we discussed with database features. The document draft for this SPD is in nanomfg/community in the
gsaimage-2.0.0-planning-1branch. The current area of focus should be 3.1 and 3.2. Careful attention to user requirements here will help us make sure we are able to implement all of the intended features. W/r to 3.1 user classes, I think it would be useful more carefully define the user classes in terms of how they interact wit hthe system. the "community user" is a bit ambiguous. Some ideas: users who upload individual SEM images with grapheneusers who load images from the database, other interactions?
Also the "nanomfg user" class is a bit confusing. nanoHub user would make more sense, but techicaly all of our user access vai nanoHub, now...