Problem/Motivation

The current Case Studies section on Drupal.org (http://drupal.org/cases) is incredibly sad, lacks images of any kind whatsoever, and is filled with outdated information (and even some sites that are no longer Drupal sites—oops!)

Proposed resolution

Create a dedicated content type for case studies, plus a view to show them off, and wrap it into a feature.

Remaining tasks

Basic functionality for case studies is ready.
For next steps check initiative page: http://drupal.org/community-initiatives/drupalorg-content

User interface changes

- New content type "Case study", with several fields ( "http://drupal.org/files/Joe's%20Ball%20Bearings%20%7C%20drupal.org_1328471604013.png">screenshot of form / screenshot of display)
- New view displaying case studies in teaser mode, filterable by sector: http://drupal.org/files/Drupal%20Case%20Studies%20%7C%20drupal.org_13284...
- New block to encourage creation of new case studies
http://drupal.org/case-studies... content suggestions in comments below

Deployment notes

Ensure Sector taxonomy allows the content type 'Case study'

API changes

None.

Original report by drumm

This section of the redesign wasn't implemented in the MVP. An overview of the other issues related to case studies can be found at http://drupal.org/community-initiatives/drupalorg-content

1. Build case study (this issue)
- Leader image(s) follow ideal upload strategy researched for project nodes
- Add taxonomy like http://drupal.org/cases
- references to Drupal shops and people that worked on the site, integrated with http://drupal.org/marketplace.

2. Make the case study page view (this issue)
- Keep it basic, like Sites Made with Drupal block on home page, repeated 3x per row, a few rows per page

3. Make it into a feature

TODO after this is done
Create issue: Replace links on homepage with links to the new case study content
Create issue: Edit showcase forum as needed, direct people to case study content

Additional things to think about:
- Break up the layout a bit with different sizes?
- Make room for ads?
- More complex featuring than simply 'promote to front page'?

Comments

dww’s picture

One of the primary features we're going to want for case studies is a multi-valued node reference field pointing to the project nodes that are highlighted in the case study or used to build each site. Then, we can start to do all kinds of cool things to help people find the right modules based on what kind of case studies tend to reference certain modules, etc.

Not sure what "Leader image(s) follow ideal upload strategy researched for project nodes" is really supposed to mean. I think drumm is referring to this:

#371999: Configure multiple images for project nodes

There's not that much "ideal upload strategy" there that's been "researched". That issue basically says: "Duh, we need CCK + imagefield (and imagecache), not image.module + image attach"...

Amazon’s picture

I think this needs to be a well designed static page first. We've got a good cross section of case studies that we can cherry pick from the last several years. We've gotten good feedback on the new well designed pages like the get started page, so let's lead with design. We can worry about keeping it dynamic and manageable as a secondary concern. We've got a long list of development work and new features are going to come second to fixing our long list of bugs to fix.

Ideally we would have 6 industry case studies from 5 continents in the long run. We should have both a list of case studies and screenshots of sites that are Drupal sites, that don't yet have case studies.

I've put together a new marketing wiki page:
http://groups.drupal.org/sites-by-industry
Types of sites: http://groups.drupal.org/drupal-showcase-by-type

drumm’s picture

Ok, let's discuss the static page at #940844: 'Sites Made With Drupal' page: suggestions to improve page clarity. We do have a steady stream of new case studies that would be good highlight. Judging by those wiki pages, it would be good to get the taxonomy in line.

drumm’s picture

Status: Active » Postponed
gdemet’s picture

Version: » 6.x-3.x-dev
Status: Postponed » Active

Upon some backchannel discussion with Neil Drumm and Lisa Rex, here's my personal wishlist for a new showcase/case study section on Drupal.org, as the guy who's been responsible for reviewing most of the case studies that have been promoted to the home page over the last year and a half:

  • Existing content should be extensively pruned and only the "best of the best" of the existing case studies should be migrated to the new showcase.
  • I think it should be easier for people to make new case studies, but I don't think that new case studies should be featured in the showcase until they've received editorial review. One of the issues with the current "Success stories" section is that anyone can add material to it, and the quality of the material that's currently in there is ...uneven... at best.
  • In order to ease the administrative burden of reviewing and curating case studies, we should have an editorial style guide for writers to follow. I'd be more than happy to work with others to create this. This style guide should not only outline how case studies should be structured and formatted, but what kind of content should go into them (e.g., background about the client and their business problem, why Drupal was chosen, etc.)
  • I'd like to see us continue having at least two people review case studies before they get added to the showcase. These folks should probably come from a dedicated team of half a dozen people or so so we're not reliant on whoever happens to be around the webmaster's queue at any given time.
  • The showcase should be targeted at people outside the existing community who want to know more about how Drupal can solve various problems for various different kinds of companies and organizations. Outside of the showcase, I think we should also have a place where people who just want to announce new Drupal sites and solicit feedback from the community can post them. I think this has tremendous community value.
  • There should be some kind of protocol for reviewing case studies periodically (like once a year or so) and archiving them if they're no longer current or relevant.
  • Overall, I think the goal should not be to have more case studies, but better case studies.

I realize most of these things aren't really technical concerns at all, but I wanted to throw them out there to get the discussion going and make sure we're generally operating from a consistent set of values and principles as we move forward with this. If folks think differently about anything I've said, please chime in!

lisarex’s picture

Hey, let's do this. I agree 100% with George's comments in #5. There's a the Drupal.org style guide that currently sits under Docs but really, I think it should be clear it's for all of Drupal.org since we're not going to have a separate style guide for About pages, etc.

http://drupal.org/contribute/documentation/guide/style

lisarex’s picture

I made a new content type, unpublished by default for now, and the labeling on the body and instructions can be adjusted http://drupal.org/node/add/showcase. Max 10 images.

Next, we need to add Showcase to the existing taxonomies:
* Drupal version http://drupal.org/admin/content/taxonomy/5
* Sectors http://drupal.org/admin/content/taxonomy/50

Then, arranging content into a grid-display view and exposing taxonomy filters, and exporting that to code. I like the idea repeating the screenshot 3x3 as drumm's suggests. A 1 line summary about the site would be great. That can be a split teaser if we don't want to add a field.

The paths to the content are :
* The nodes live in the About book
* Links from the home page
* The About landing page
* We could consider linking the Showcase from the footer under About when we're ready to be loud and proud about it!
* Since we have the marketplace, it would be great to have Showcase nodes associated with organizations appear on their marketplace node, and a built by link to the marketplace organization. This will hopefully encourage Showcase entries.

(Then we curate and migrate the best existing showcases, deprecate the forum, delete the old Sites Made With Drupal nodes, magic....)

lisarex’s picture

Just noticed there's Types of Site too http://drupal.org/admin/content/taxonomy/32. Not sure if that's better than Sectors; seems like there's overlap.

Let me know if you have any feedback on suggestions in #7.

lisarex’s picture

Status: Active » Needs review

Re Comment #6, the style guide has been combined into one; see #1154526: Create a single Drupal.org style guide

Would be great to get some +1's and get this set up. But then we have the challenge of getting content into the new content type and managing that process. :)

larowlan’s picture

Following up with ideas from http://groups.drupal.org/node/147949
*Country based tagging to highlight a particular market - this may need to include multiple countries, one for the country of the team who built it, another for that of the client
*Filtering/searching by country/tags etc
*Linking to d.o profiles for those who worked on it (and subsequent back references from the project page ala userreference) (profile pictures would be great!)
*Thumbs up/down features?
*Linking to project pages to help users decide what modules to use with subsequent back referencing from the modules page (As used in ...) - would certainly help people evaluate modules.
I think this also ties in with http://drupal.org/node/1080550 in terms of promoting 'social aspects' of drupal.org - sites people work on are a form of 'bling' in the drupal world, people would be keen to post better quality (and more frequent) case studies if there was this level of promotion.

EDIT: back references from user profiles to projects refers to showcase projects not drupal.org/project/xx projects

catch’s picture

I can't remember where it was last discussed, but larowlan's suggestion to have a node reference to projects gets a big thumbs up from me, I would much rather this than straight votes/comments on modules.

larowlan’s picture

Issue tags: +prairie

Adding prairie tag

dww’s picture

@larowlan, @catch: Yeah, I mentioned the node ref in comment #1 above, and I don't know of another issue where that's being dealt with. It was certainly discussed on various g.d.o posts over the years, but AFAIK that specific item never made it into an issue until this one...

Cheers,
-Derek

lisarex’s picture

@larowlan in terms of country, "Countries served" is already a taxonomy on d.o., used in the Marketplace. It would be entirely possible to reuse that.

Nodereference usage is proposed in #995292: Noderef field on issues for Documentation project but I do not want this stalled on that...

Can we approve work in #7, move forward with the agreement that this is the MVP for the new showcase, and then add enhancements later?

larowlan’s picture

+1 for features at #7 + countries served taxonomy, Lisa - how can I test these?
I'm keen to pitch in with building the views, theming, custom code etc etc.
I'm assuming you've got a development version of d.o - can I get access to pitch in/review/whatever is needed?
PM me if you need my public key.
I'm happy to work on mockups for the showcase node type/view and coding the subsequent template files.

cossovich’s picture

@lisarex re #7 I like the idea of industry sectors rather than 'types of sites'. For example, is a marketing micro-site for a university a 'marketing' site or a 'education' site. I think a filter based on industry sector is slightly more unambiguous.... or less biogious... you know what I mean.

Agileware’s picture

Keen to see this implemented. Subscribing.

larowlan’s picture

Regarding moderation and an editorial style guide etc, interested in feedback about whether it would simplify the process to break the body field up into a number of textarea (rich text) fields - into sections - like @lisarex proposed for project pages here: http://growingventuresolutions.com/blog/module-owners-how-make-your-modu... -
suggested fields/sections:
*Brief overview/synopsis (reused in view listing? - max character count)
*Introduction (text area - optional)
*Goals and requirements (text area)
*Why Drupal was chosen (text area)
*Design and development process (text area - this one to be the body?)
*Key modules used (node reference with autocomplete)
*Base theme (node ref - optional)
*Custom code (text area)
*Why Drupal was the right choice (ie success stories, goals kicked etc) (text area)
*Lessons learned/Things we'd do differently next time (text area)
*Moving forward (text area - things still to be done/future plans)
*Community contributions (text area - optionally list projects contributed back as a result)
*Url (url field)
*Developer (firm/individual name) (text field)
*Designer (firm/individual name) (text field)
*Drupal.org profiles (userreference field autocomplete)

That way we can require certain fields to ensure that there is consistency and make reviewing simpler.

larowlan’s picture

I don't totally agree with the 'Overall, I think the goal should not be to have more case studies, but better case studies'. Whilst in principal I think a degree of editorial control is warranted, I think this kind of thing could fracture the community, see http://groups.drupal.org/node/147949 - even though this issue is on the same page in terms of what is proposed there, several in that thread want to 'go it alone' drupalmodules.com style because they don't want to see it too exclusive. Personally I already send clients to my drupal.org profile and like the idea of expanding that functionality further whilst promoting drupal success stories at the same time.
However what this does leave us needing is some form of vote up/down/ radioactivity sorting to the listings to ensure that the cream rises to the top.
BTW apologies for the conduct of my fellow au drupalers on that thread, it has really deteriorated into a flame war.

dww’s picture

Re: #14: and #995292: Noderef field on issues for Documentation project -- that's a totally different use-case for node reference fields. We already have CCK + node_reference enabled thanks to #651484: Enable CCK and node_reference. This is completely separate: a reference on these new case study nodes (which are a new node type, not just documentation "book" pages) that points to project nodes.

Re: #14: "Can we approve work in #7, move forward with the agreement that this is the MVP for the new showcase, and then add enhancements later?"

Sure. However, adding the multi-valued node reference field (to point to project nodes) so we can at least start collecting the data would be both easy and a big win. So, I'd vote for including that field in the node type itself as part of the MVP (minimum viable product). Again, nothing fancy for display, but allow the references from early on so we encourage that richer data in these nodes.

Re: #18: I like the concept of separate fields to encourage different sections like that, but we definitely shouldn't make *all* of those suggestions required fields. Furthermore, we don't *just* want node reference to point to the major modules used in the site. A huge part of the value in these site showcase case studies is the full text explanation of *how* given modules were used to solve specific problems. An auto-generated block or list of links like Views isn't very helpful on its own. You really want to read about the interesting ways they used Views, or why they choose image gallery solution #27, instead of the other 134 options. ;) Anyway, we definitely want the node ref for the cool features that'll enable, but we also want to allow free-form text to annotate those node references. If there was a way to add a text area comment associated with each node ref, all the better, but I think that's going to get too complicated. A single text area will be fine, at least for the first iteration.

In general: yes: roll out something that solves a specific need ASAP, then we can roll out improvements on top of it once they materialize. However, the other factor to balance is that the more structured the data is, the more powerful things we'll be able to do with it down the road. We should aim for richer content and data collection now. We can sort out cool new display functionality later. For now, display can be dumb concatenation of all the data. It's easy to do dumb concat of smarter data now and over time figure out how to display it more smartly, than it is to start with "dumb" data that's easy to display, and then try to separate it into more structured data later.

Cheers,
-Derek

larowlan’s picture

Derek, yes I agree with your comments regarding a compound field would be better (anyone else remember multigroup that was once shipped with CCK but without an info file...)

larowlan’s picture

First crack at what should be required:
*Brief overview/synopsis YES
*Introduction NO
*Goals and requirements YES
*Why Drupal was chosen YES
*Design and development process YES - BODY
*Key modules used YES (we want to collect this data)
*Base theme NO
*Custom code NO
*Why Drupal was the right choice YES
*Lessons learned/Things we'd do differently next time YES
*Moving forward NO
*Community contributions YES
*Url YES
*Developer YES
*Designer NO
*Drupal.org profiles NO

Thoughts/comments?

dww’s picture

First of all, I'm still in favor of the proposal in #7 + the multi-valued node reference to point to project nodes for phase 0. We can get more fancy later. My comments about "dumb" vs. "smart" data were not meant to derail #7 and say that all of the separate fields from #18 should be implemented in the first pass. Really, the key thing I care about is the project node reference field. Everything else can be handled later...

That said, if we're going to continue discussing #18, I'd say only these fields should be *required*:

Title
Brief overview/synopsis
Design and development process (sure, that can be the body)
URL of the site

Everything else is optional structure. I don't even think we should *require* node references to the key projects used for building the site. Maybe that's just not the focus or point of the case study, or all they have is the standard "we used views and CCK in the obvious way" stuff in which case it doesn't add much value to the content of the showcase article.

lisarex’s picture

@dww, excellent points.

Re: #22 That's too many separate fields, and we don't want to make creating a showcase a huge burden, so here's my take:

*Brief overview of project YES
*Url YES
*Goals and requirements YES
*Why Drupal was chosen YES
*Development process YES
*Design process YES
*Key modules used YES (we want to collect this data)
*Lessons learned/Things we'd do differently next time YES
*Community contributions YES
*Developer YES (organization name, right?, could noderef to Organization nodes)
*Designer NO
*Drupal.org profiles NO
*Base theme NO <- covered in design process?
*Custom code NO <- covered in dev process?

Note, I separated Design from Development processes. I think it would be interested to display these separately in the future.

And then we've got taxonomy to choose from.

larowlan is going to build the content type on http://content.redesign.devdrupal.org/ so we can use that environment for figuring it all out! If anyone else needs access, let me know.

larowlan’s picture

@dww re #23 no worries
@lisarex re #24 ok, although we need to balance 'increasing the burden' with 'increasing the quality' and 'reducing the need for editorial intervention'
will proceed on the basis of #24

larowlan’s picture

Work done:
*Enabled user reference and fieldgroup
*Updated help text, description for showcase node type
*Added country, sector and drupal version vocabs to showcase node type
*Added overview field
*Added url field
*Added Goals and requirements
*Added why drupal was chosen
*Added development process (body)
*Added design process
*Added key modules used and why this module was chosen - for now these are separate fields in a fieldgroup with each nth text area corresponding with the nth auto complete nodereference. If we can enable the content_multigroup module and set the fieldgroup to use that style, the two will be aligned better on the node edit form - note node ref field doesn't use a view but perhaps should to filter out unmaintained projects.
*Added lessons learned
*Added community contribs
*Added organisation noderef for developer as well as a plain text field for when the organisation isn't in the marketplace.
*Added profiles field
*Added permission allowing authenticated users to submit showcases

Also added an image field which we talked about but hadn't added.

Next week I'll get started on the views and the node display.

http://content.redesign.devdrupal.org/node/add/showcase

larowlan’s picture

Roughly moved http://content.redesign.devdrupal.org/node/1061630 over to http://content.redesign.devdrupal.org/node/1115194
Content largely fits but this would be something we may need to ask existing forum content owners to migrate themself?

rcross’s picture

RE #22 / #24 - i think it is very wrong to single out developers here, especially when we already get criticised for not being "friendly" to designers (in whatever capacity that means).

I think it would be better to have a compound field of "role" and "person" - whether the person is just a text field with a name or a user reference to a d.o profile. We could call this something general like "contributors" or "implementors" or "team members" or whatever.

This would allow for people like project managers, testers, trainers, sys admin, etc to all be represented as they see fit. We could make "role" a taxonomy if we feel the need to keep it well defined, otherwise just keep it as a open text field so people can a self-define their role. You'll likely get things like "lead developer" or "rockstar" or "contractor" or any number of other things.

rcross’s picture

regarding the balance of increasing quality vs increasing the burden - can we just minimise the number of required fields? Title and description seem like the only hard and fast requirements.

larowlan’s picture

@rcross, sorry lost you on irc - my connection dropped out then you were gone, I'll try and catch you on Monday.

larowlan’s picture

Development for this project moved from content.redesign.devdrupal.org to http://showcase-drupal.redesign.devdrupal.org - let me know if you want access and I'll reset your password.

Alex UA’s picture

Are there any fully populated case studies on the redesign site to look at? Otherwise, could I have access to check out the new form?

lisarex’s picture

Assigned: drumm » Unassigned

larowlan, I'd love access to the dev site.

larowlan’s picture

Access given to lisarex and Alex UA, alex - check your email

larowlan’s picture

IRC chat log regarding use of multigroup fields:

Resultant outcome: we need to simplify the fields involved

(08:25:47 AM) larowlan: the fields we're proposing are leaning towards CCK 6.x.3
(08:26:20 AM) larowlan: ie there's a 'what modules did you use and why' which is a multigroup field featuring noderef + textarea
(08:26:44 AM) larowlan: and there's a 'who worked on it and what did they do' which is similar but using a userref instead
(08:27:15 AM) larowlan: lisarex said alpha modules are not in the picture for d.o - so I guess the next best thing is to write a custom field/widget
(08:27:20 AM) larowlan: what are your thoughts?
(08:27:21 AM) drumm: larowlan: is there a cleaner upgrade path to D7 for CCK 3 than 2?
(08:27:56 AM) drumm: my main concern here is ability to upgrade to D7
(08:28:23 AM) larowlan: ok, not sure, I guess that's a question for the CCK folks
(08:29:19 AM) larowlan: looking at the content multigroup install hook it looks like it adds an extra column to the fieldgroup table
(08:29:47 AM) larowlan: but it doesn't look like multigroup has a home in D7
(08:30:02 AM) larowlan: noderef/userref have gone to the reference project
(08:30:59 AM) larowlan: fieldgroup has gone to the fieldgroup project but that states 'this project will not include multigroup feature as it existed for drupal6.'
(08:31:37 AM) larowlan: so I guess that answers that question, multigroup is out of the question - so I guess we need to either a) simplify our requirements or b) write something custom
(08:32:38 AM) larowlan: I think a) is the better option - I don't want to loose the reporting/stats ability we get by adding the noderef/userref fields but we will just need to reduce the 'why'd you choose this module' and 'what'd they do' to a simpler option

Will post update on progress tonight AEST (GMT+10)

larowlan’s picture

Progressing slowly, finding time is an issue as always.
Anyone willing to help out by posting some dummy showcase sites so I can start the views theming and node theming, please contact me via my contact form, on irc or on this thread

drumm’s picture

I took a brief look into this sandbox. I think the number of text fields should be reduced a lot. I'd rather see that content done by h2 and h3 tags within the content. They don't provide any additional value as fields (unlike references to users, organizations, and projects); and box us into a certain format, that we want to be able to change.

larowlan’s picture

thanks drumm will incorporate your feedback
seriously need to set aside some time to work on this

drumm’s picture

Do be sure to put notes on suggested content & sections in the body field's help text. I think all text fields except "why this module is important" might be able to go. And use the node form submission guidelines, linking to any guidelines that don't fit, like http://drupal.org/front-page-schedule.

lisarex’s picture

Status: Needs review » Needs work

Any progress? @larowlan, do you want some help? I'm sure we could get some other volunteers to help finish this off, and I can dedicate some time too.

And now that I look at the form, I agree with Drumm that we could reduce the number fields. I also want to clean up the labels too. If we can create a good example show case item (perhaps using an existing one), we should link to that, as the main reason folks aren't submitting showcases is they think it's a lot of work.

I've had another thought about the name. Given that Acquia has a showcase that is largely just home page screenshots and taxonomy, the d.o. version can serve another audience by focusing on technical detail. So perhaps we should call it Case Studies?

lisarex’s picture

screenshot of node/add/showcase for those who don't have access to the site

larowlan’s picture

Hi Lisa
Yeah, I'm snowed under at the moment (isn't everyone) - any help would be great.
Hoping to get a window of time opening up in mid September.
Re the 'simplify the number of fields' - agreed - what do you think about using hook_form_alter to autofill the body with suggested headings/sections etc when creating a blank node.
When creating new issues I find myself 'copy/pasting' the new suggested format. Similarly with creating projects I find myself copying your suggested content (from your gvs post on the topic). I think it would make quality/editorial control simpler if the structure was auto-filled.
Re the case study vs acquia screenshots comment I think we have far more opportunities on d.o (no offence to your future employer) than they do on acquia. As discussed with drumm above - longer term I see this integrating with the new marketplace features, user profiles and module pages. That kind of data isn't available to the acquia showcase. I'm thinking 'projects I've worked on' on profile pages, 'some of our success stories' on marketplace pages, 'sites using this module' on module pages etc. With the node reference and user reference fields we've got in the current setup we can do that kind of thing fairly easily.
Plus that kind of 'bling' for your profile page/marketplace node will encourage people to get busy submitting!

Lee

larowlan’s picture

One final thing, can we agree to keep the 'why drupal was chosen' field - this would make for a great 'testimonial' style quotes slider in the future - ie random quotes that speak to Drupal's awesomeness. I think the variety of quotes would be similar to Dries keynote slide on 'describe Drupal in one word' and would be a great marketing tool.

lisarex’s picture

Title: Build a real showcase » Build Drupal Case Studies

Can we remove the word 'showcase', and call it "Drupal Case Studies?" There's the http://drupalshowcase.com, which is well organized and well designed, but totally agree, very light on meaty detail. This technical detail is what will set Case Studies apart.

I know this has stalled out a bit but it's still on my radar to push forward.

larowlan’s picture

Yeah, stalled here too - so busy at the moment.
Still on the radar - at very least will work on it over Xmas holiday.

lisarex’s picture

FileSize
438.02 KB

I made a bit of progress today. Here's what the node edit form looks like now

what's changed:
-Renamed content type to Case study/casestudy
-Updated Brief Overview instructions
-Body field became Design and development process
-Renamed Images to screenshots
-Removed title from URL (these are harder to grok than just seeing it's a URL)
-Shortened on instructions on team members
-Positioned organization and team member reference fields above the Project team field
-Reordered fields on the content type
-Fewer fields are required now
-Added Sector vocab (forgot to add Drupal version before screenshot)

What we need next:
-Need some folks to add test content to the dev site
-Create a view
-Add content type and view to a Case study feature (there's a Showcase feature, but given that we've changed the name to avoid confusion with the other showcase, think the Feature name should change too!)

larowlan’s picture

Thanks Lisa

lisarex’s picture

I've updated the content type (reduce/condense fields), created a separate 'primary' screenshot (so that it could be required, but others aren't), and added a view! You can see the view and nodes at http://showcase-drupal.redesign.devdrupal.org/case-studies (pw drupal/drupal)

Feature module (with .txt added to file extension) and screenshot of the edit form and screenshot of the view attached.

View issues
- I'm using the Node display to reduce the amount of themeing (and because that's what the marketplace and community spotlight views are doing), but somehow the fields I'd told the contnet type to exclude in the teaser are still displaying, so I will have to investigate!

Node issues:
- how did the Marketplace nodes get themed?
- I'm not much a themer so if anyone wants to take a crack at it, awesome!

larowlan, I'd have to investigate how to do hook_form_alter to autofill the fields, but perhaps someoen else can do it as well.

lisarex’s picture

Issue summary: View changes

update summary

silverwing’s picture

@lisarex - I like where this is going. My biggest fear is that people reading the case studies would think you needed $20,000 and a Drupal shop to make a decent site. Looking at your screenshots I don't have that fear!

Primary Image - Right now our guidelines are 'For Drupal Showcase posts, the first image needs to be 300px wide and about 200px high with a file size of around 30kb for the "Sites Made With Drupal" front page block.' I'm not sure how resizing would be done if needed for the new content type, but just wanted to bring this up now.

The section "Project Goals, Requirement, and Outcomes" I'm thinking it should be preference with something like "Describe the project - goals, requirements, and outcomes."

Whenever I reviewed posts for Front Page Promotion, I'd always ask the writer to give something back - code, a tutorial, a module - something a reader could potentially take away and use on their own site. So I'm glad to see a "Contribution" section! ++

silverwing’s picture

I would prefer not shutting down the Showcase forum. We need (and users expect) a low-level place for "look what I made!" and "What do you think?" posts. Keeping them in one place would prevent users from filling up News & Announcements and the General Discussion forums.

lisarex’s picture

@silverwing, thanks for the comments. I can fix the image and section labeling. I'll wait another couple days to see if any other comments materialize.

Also, fair point about the Showcase forum. I'll edit the summary.

lisarex’s picture

Issue summary: View changes

updated to do's (some issues were created)

lisarex’s picture

We're gong to have to adopt the way http://drupal.org/marketplace-preview handles the filtering by sector, so the view follows the marketplace view e.g. uses the argument for sector. Not sure how this display is generated and my limited searching skills aren't finding anything the the drupalorg customizations module.

But for now, I mostly want to get the content type into place so that we're able to start populating content.

For the fields, I switched 'Why Drupal was chosen' and 'Brief overview' (which was the node body), because on the teaser, we only want the brief overview to display, and also, there label 'Brief overview' isn't needed but 'Why Drupal was chosen' is!

UPDATE: ignore this feature; posting a new one in a minute

lisarex’s picture

Notes: I've added a bit more guidance in the help/tidied it up again.: http://showcase-drupal.redesign.devdrupal.org/node/add/casestudy

I need to have this feature in place by Drupalcon, since it's integral to my sprint! :)

Related things:
The sector taxonomy needs to be rephrased so that it works for case studies too... "If you specialize in any sectors, like publishing, education, or non-profit." -> "List related sectors." perhaps?

FYI, I don't have ssh access to this dev site, so it probably needs a git pull.

webchick’s picture

Tagging.

webchick’s picture

Issue summary: View changes

edit forum line

webchick’s picture

Issue summary: View changes

Updating the issue summary some (webchick)

webchick’s picture

Issue summary: View changes

More of that. (webchick)

webchick’s picture

Issue summary: View changes

More (webchick)

webchick’s picture

Ok, did a couple of things:

1) Updated the issue summary with what I hope is a complete summary.
2) Added a test user (user/pass "bananas/bananas") to the sandbox so anyone can try this.

I didn't have time to actually review this after getting all that done; hopefully tomorrow. But hope that's helpful to the next person coming in 55+ comments in. :D

webchick’s picture

Issue summary: View changes

And once more (webchick)

webchick’s picture

Issue summary: View changes

x

larowlan’s picture

Hmm, reading this issue is a sad indictment of the amount of free time I've had... yeah those Xmas plans didn't turn out.
Will try and review on Monday.

lisarex’s picture

Status: Needs review » Needs work

Update: drumm rebuilt the dev environment on http://showcase-drupal.redesign.devdrupal.org/ (this is good because a lot of d.o. code has changed, and it means newer user accounts will be available on it)

larowlan (or anyone), because of this new sanitized database, your login won't work. I'm user/1 but if you send me the link to your user account I can make you an admin again. Or use banana/banana ... although there's nothing to test until the feature in place, which drumm is planning to do soon.

drumm’s picture

Here is a screenshot of what there is right now.

lisarex’s picture

This is the most recent export of the Feature.

drumm’s picture

Status: Needs work » Fixed
Issue tags: +needs drupal.org deployment

This looks much better. Committed and deploying.

drumm’s picture

Deployed, added some permissions, and put a basic block on the right of http://drupal.org/case-studies.

lisarex’s picture

lisarex’s picture

Issue summary: View changes

xxx

lisarex’s picture

Issue summary: View changes

updated feature link, added deployment notes

lisarex’s picture

Status: Needs review » Fixed

Oops, this is fixed.

webchick’s picture

YES! Awesome awesome awesome! Thanks so much for all the hard work on this folks!!!

larowlan’s picture

Thanks Lisa for picking this up when I dropped it. Looks great.
Are you happy for me to promote the fact that this is available on the planet, including a call to action for people to start contributing content?

webchick’s picture

I think it probably makes sense to have a couple of "starter" content in there first before pimping it too widely. So maybe take one of the better-done case studies from previously and re-format it for the new template?

larowlan’s picture

pimping, lol.

From memory the symnatec one was well done, will migrate that at lunch and look for a few others.

Lee

lisarex’s picture

larowlan, maybe not yet. There's still some work to be done and what's there currently might not meet expectations. However if you wanted to dig in and test the process before Friday's sprint, I would be ever so grateful: #1487734: Migration guidelines for evaluating and updating old case studies

larowlan’s picture

Lisa
+1 on guidelines - will do some testing of the process.

LR

lisarex’s picture

Updated feature. Changes include:

View is now a grid, displaying only title, primary screenshot and taxonomy, with an additional sort by 'promoted to front page'

Content type doesn't require the Community contribution. This is temporary, at least during the migration phase. And doesn't default to front page!

lisarex’s picture

Issue summary: View changes

add link to block

silverwing’s picture

I unchecked "promote to front page" from the create case study content type.

lisarex’s picture

Thanks silverwing!

Here's the feature again, this time with relaxed max dimensions on image upload restrictions (now 1800x1800). People were running into problems with that.

drumm’s picture

Committed & deployed.

drumm’s picture

Status: Fixed » Closed (fixed)

Automatically closed -- issue fixed for 2 weeks with no activity.

Anonymous’s picture

Issue summary: View changes

update urls

tvn’s picture

tvn’s picture

Issue summary: View changes

edited remaining tasks, added link to next steps

  • Commit 11192c9 on 6.x-3.x, 7.x-3.x-dev by drumm:
    [#948062] Relaxed max dimensions on images and gridded view.
    
    
  • Commit 131f648 on 6.x-3.x, 7.x-3.x-dev authored by lisarex, committed by drumm:
    [#948062] Build Drupal Case Studies