Discuss new solution to establish the communication between submitter and curator
As stated in #7785 the checking for messaged in the Redmine instance serving as communication hub slows down the display of registration working sets a lot (43%)
--> decide for another solution to establish the communication between submitter and curator
The concept of using redmine as communication and messaging hub has been discussed during the last playday session. Result of this discussion was that this concept is not fulfilling the requirements. We should expect a lot of direct communication between submitter and curation which will often pass by any messaging system/hub. Therefor it might not make much sense to have such hub for controlled communication.
#4 Updated by Andreas Kohlbecker 9 months ago
Normaler Weise würde man auf normalen E-Mail-Kontakt ausweichen und eine Funktions-Email einrichten, z.B. firstname.lastname@example.org, allerdings werden zurzeit von der Zedat Funktionsmails auf den Prüfstand gestellt, um den Bestand drastisch zu senken...
#6 Updated by Andreas Kohlbecker 9 months ago
- Priority changed from New to Highest
- Target version set to Release 5.5
- % Done changed from 0 to 10
#13 Updated by Wolf-Henning Kusber 4 months ago
- Assignee changed from Wolf-Henning Kusber to Andreas Kohlbecker
- % Done changed from 10 to 100
As plan B: E-Mail email@example.com is working now,
Currently most phycologists contact the curator by the personal bgbm mail.
April 2019: There is c. one message in/out per day concerning PhycoBank issues. This can be handled.
Plan A task #7269 will not be continued.
Plan B task (this ticket) is as a practicalbe and simple solution solved.