Hi. Il 12/08/2014 09:39, Stefano Maggiolo ha scritto: > Hi, > > thanks for your work (and nice to interact with Lorenzo again too)! > > Yes, separating users and contests was a long-standing wanted feature. I > don't think there is much advantage for 2-days contests, where we are > more or less ok with the RWS model. I wanted this for training settings > were you may have many contests and you want to do something for which > you need to connect users in different contests, and that is smarter > than what RWS does (which is just a sum). I feel that we could do much > more for these settings and this goes in the right directions. > > About tasks, I'm not so sure of the advantages, I have the feeling that > your use case is not shared with many people. I'm not even deeply > against, if not for the work required. I agree: while for users it is reasonable that you want to keep a logic link between users of two different contests, for tasks I don't think you want the same thing. You need to have a tool to duplicate a task and copy it to another contest, but I would think to this as a clone, not as two links to the same task. Also because, as Stefano noted, when you want to modify one of them you probably don't want to touch the others (BTW, you _may_ want to touch the others too: then another tool to synchronize some aspects of different tasks would be useful). > - What timeframe do you expect to finish all of these changes? Even > though I didn't tell anybody yet, I'd like CMS to follow a best-effort > semestral release cycle, with heavier stuff going in in the release > ending in July, and milder stuff in January. Do you think that this is > "mild" enough and would be implemented fast enough to get in in January? Well, we still have to agree on such a proposal, which I'm reading here for the first time. For instance, for me it makes much more sense to do heavy stuff in autumn and bugfixing and consolidation stuff in spring, which is the periods when there are more contests around (for example, IOI is usually in summer). Anyway, I don't think that so far we have enough "organizational energy" to stick to such a scheme. Giovanni. -- Giovanni Mascellani <giovanni.mascellani@xxxxxx> PhD Student - Scuola Normale Superiore, Pisa, Italy http://poisson.phc.unipi.it/~mascellani
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
