JBoss Business Process and Rules Development JBoss Data Virtualization Development JBoss Integration and SOA Development JBoss SOA 5.x Development

Update category names for installer. ------------------------------------ Key: JBTIS-199 URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBTIS-199 Project: JBoss Tools Integration Stack Issue Type: Task Security Level: Public(Everyone can see) Affects Versions: 4.1.3 Reporter: Paul Leacu Assignee: Paul Leacu Fix For: 4.1.3.Beta5 I've received two potentially contradictory BZs ([1], [2]) and there's been recent discussion involving the JBDSIS 7.0.0.Beta4 category names. This would affect both equinox/p2 and JBoss Central mylyn/discovery labelling. The issue is the following - currently the p2 installer presents the user with this: > JBoss Business Process and Rules development > JBoss Data Virtualization development > JBoss Fuse development > JBoss SOA 5.x development > JBoss SOA development The site category name definitions are inconsistent because there's a mixture of product names and abstract concept labelling. The idea was to have FuseSource users and legacy 5.x SOA users have an easy time finding what they needed to install and a general user could figure out what they wanted by the abstract concept label. These are expandable categories - if the user wants to know what their getting they can expand the category. BZ [1] suggests changing the following: Option [A]: > JBoss Business Process and Rules development > JBoss Data Virtualization development > JBoss Fuse development > JBoss SOA 5.x development > JBoss Fuse Service Works That clearly leaves us with 2 "Fuse" categories, one of which doesn't contain the Fuse features, and expands on the product name based category labelling. If you're installing 'Fuse Service Works' it could be argued that you'd expect to find that as a choice. Alan made an interesting suggestion to combine SOA and Fuse, keeping the abstract labelling and resulting in the following: Option [B]: > JBoss Business Process and Rules development > JBoss Data Virtualization development > JBoss Integration development > JBoss SOA 5.x development That leaves the 'SOA 5.x' category as an outlier. Acceptable? Would something like this be better? Option [C]: > JBoss Business Process and Rules development > JBoss Data Virtualization development > JBoss Integration development > JBoss Legacy Integration development Applying the combine Fuse algorithm to [A] you could also have this: Option [D]: > JBoss Business Process and Rules development > JBoss Data Virtualization development > JBoss Fuse Service Works > JBoss SOA 5.x development So - we're post-beta and I'm happy to accommodate the consensus - WDYT? Thanks, --paull [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1021282 [2] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1021283