Re: [limesurvey-developers] Limesurvey Report Writer: Coding in 1.92 for 2.0

[Carsten S. <car...@li...>]

Hello Tac,

this sounds very interesting although I am afraid that much of this will 
be very hard to port from 1.92 to 2.0
I strongly advise that you do your write-up first then lets discuss 
about it.
It would be a shame if you bury yourself under a huge amount of work and 
in the end finding that your feature won't fit the future structure of 
2.0/2.1. Also don't hesitate to contact me directly on IRC if you have 
any questions.


Best regards from Hamburg/Germany

Carsten Schmitz

LimeService Support

Fa. Carsten Schmitz - LimeService.com
Survey Service & Consulting
Eidelstedter Weg 23
20255 Hamburg / Germany

Email: su...@li...
Web: http://www.limeservice.com



Am 30.03.2012 13:15, schrieb Tac Tacelosky:
> A client needs some custom reporting, initially for a printout based
> on an individual survey but eventually also for detail and summary
> reports.  I'll write up a proposal linked to
> http://docs.limesurvey.org/LimeSurvey+2.x+development+documentation
> (unless there's a better spot for proposals) within the next few days,
> but my initial question has to do with coding for the working and
> stable 1.92 in such a way that it will port easily to 2.0.
>
> Structurally, the ReportWriter will be very similar to the Site/Survey
> Template Editor.  There will be a high-level Editor to define and edit
> the Report Templates, and within the Survey Administration there will
> be a way to "attach" surveys to reports.  Attached Reports will then
> be listed in the Detailed Responses page and a few other places.
>
> I'm thinking that detailed listings (filtering out the responses based
> on some criteria) can be done within the current Charts UI, since the
> criteria screen is already there.
>
> I'm poking around the Yii code now, but unless there's a good chance
> it will be stable enough to use within the next month or two, I think
> it's probably safest to write the module in 1.92 and then port it to
> 2.0, since the client would like access to it within that time frame.
>
> Thoughts on how to go forward with this?  I'll write up the proposal
> on the docs page, or I guess I could put it in as a feature request in
> the bug tracking, so it'd be easier for others to comment on it.
>
> Tac
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF email is sponsosred by:
> Try Windows Azure free for 90 days Click Here
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/sfd2d-msazure
> _______________________________________________
> limesurvey-developers mailing list
> lim...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/limesurvey-developers