Problem
I have a gitlab with a lot of old repositories. I want to mention my gitlab as a reference on my CV but I do not want all the old repositories to appear there, just the more relevant ones.
Just making the projects private is not enough as this leaves a lot of clutter in my dashboard and it is hard to see the projects I am trying to showcase.
I do not want to delete the old projects, as I want access to them in the future, I just want to hide them from other people to see that they even exist.
What I Tried
I tried archiving the old projects but they still appear on my Projects lists, just with an archived tag.
I saw mentions of playing with the "Metrics Dashboard" under the visibility settings but this is greyed out for me + I do not think this is what I need from my understanding.
Required Result
For me to be able to choose which projects appear and do not appear in my gitlab dashboard.
Thanks in advance for any help available!
EDIT
I found out that I can star and un-star projects, and that will count as activity on the project without actually changing anything. As the dashboard displays projects by when there was last activity on them then you can actually arrange your project by staring and un-staring the projects in the reverse order you want them to appear.
This somewhat does what I want, but with an ugly work around. Also it will always display 10 projects as far as I can tell, so if I want to only showcase 6 of them the best I can do is push the 4 I don't want to the bottom, but I still can't hide them completely.
This is why I am not writing this as an answer to my question. There has to be a way to just tell a project to be hidden or arrange the projects without this ugly workaround, and if there truly by design isn't a way of doing this then it will also just be good to be officially told that.
GitLab Groups do exactly what you need. See here for more info.
You can assign each project to a different group
You can move a project from one group to another as needed
You can assign different permissions and visibility for each group
You can also create subgroups
Each group/subgroup is treated as a separate namespace, meaning you access it using a different URL
So you can define a public group called yourfullname and a public subgroup called portfolio. Move the projects you want prospective employers to view to the portfolio subgroup and make sure their visibility is also public. All other groups/subgroups should be private. Then people can access your projects by visiting the following URL:
gitlab.com/yourfullname/portfolio
You can still view all of your projects in a single dashboard if you want, or you can view all projects within a group or sub-group by navigating to the desired group URL or dashboard. In the image below, archive and development are private (see the lock icon), but portfolio is public:
I am having problems figuring out a calendar workflow and am beginning to think what I need cannot be done w/out using .NET. I want to copy calendar items up and down between sites.
The site collection structure is Office-->Division-->Branch. There are 5 divisions under the office and multiple branches under each division. Each is a separate site with its own own calendar.
I want to populate a calendar on one site and have the item pushed up or down the site chain to another site calendar. So I need to be able to promote calendar events up AND down between calendars on different sites within the same site collection. Also, I don’t need the whole item copied. I need all fields except one because each site has its own set of check box values for one of the fields.
All my research has indicated this can’t be done without programming and I do not have Visual Studio. I have heard BCS may be a solution but am not sure that we have it. We are using SharePoint 2010 Enterprise Server but many things are not available to me such as Data Sources. One recommendation I got was to have one site (office) and put everything below it as site pages. So divisions and branches would just be pages, not separate sites. However, this seems like it would get out of hand quickly. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
So it looks like my site structure is not optimal as SharePoint lists and libraries do not easily flow between sites. I will need to change the structure so all the divisions and branches are site pages, not sites. This way everything will live in the same site and it will be much easier to move data around via workflow.
In this case, I won't need to move any data between calendars because now I can use one calendar for the office, divisions and branches and create different views to show the required data.
I am about to develop one liferay projects and have some query regarding that as follows..
should we create a different portlet project per section or we should combine all section in single portlet project?
we have a different section like "Campaign","Advertise" etc now each section is interconnected,
i mean to say in i would be able to display list of advertise mapped with particular portlet. can please guide me?
I think by section you mean Categories in the Add more section that appears in the dockbar at top-left corner of the portal page.
It is not mandatory to create different portlet projects that go in different categories. It is purely your choice keeping in mind future management.
Following are some considerations to keep all the portlets in one project:
If the portlets are going to use each others services
The portlets will depend on each other for showing the same or similar data, like take for eg: Documents & Media portlet and Documents & Media display portlet would go in one project.
I would say to keep in mind the Software Design Principle of Cohesion and Loose coupling.
This is what I can think at the moment. Hope this helps you in taking your own decision.
Try and put all Portlets under one Project. So that deploy is easy because basically the config files (like, liferay-portlet.tld, liferay-portlet-ext.tld) will be same.
You might wanna make different projects for code that's not about portlets.
I mean different project for Theme, or UI class, different one under Services/Server Side Java code, different for database config/connections etc.
All portlets could go under one project for above mentioned reason.
And you can still have separate space / loose coupling inside this one big portlet project because your (javascript/whichever tech you're using) code will be in separate folders.
About your question of displaying a particular list inside of the portlet, I guess it depends on how you want to code inside that portlet to show your list.
I agree with Prakash K.
Moreover, you should need to have two portlets in the same project (and with "project", I hear "war") if you need to share private portletsessions. So, as Prakash said, if you need interactions between 2 portlets, use one single project.
You can find more information about this particular point in this great blog (not mine): Liferay session sharing demystified
We use SharePoint 2007 and have set up a web application with several site collections. One for each of our clients. We'd like to synchronize content in all of the site collections. Maybe having a central repository, then all other site collections get content from here.
I was looking at Lightning Tools Conductor web part and seems a pretty good solution. However, I'm wondering if this can also be possible using the Content Deployment feature to copy a site from the central repository to all other site collections.
I do not advice you to copy and thus duplicate the information from your central repository to the other site collections. You'll lose precious disk space, performance and scalability.
If you have content that is created in a common site collection, you should either use the built-in web services or create dedicated ones to retrieve the content within the targeted site collections.
I usually create cross site collection look-up fields that allows a contributor to pick an entity from my central repository in a visual way and apply the rendering of the content once the page is in view mode.
That might not suit every need but I don't think content duplication is a wiser choice.
Edit : re-reading your question, is there a specific reason why you want to copy a complete site (spweb I guess) rather than specific content inside ?
We have had SharePoint where I work for a little while now, but we've not done a lot with it. We have an intranet with hundreds of ASP/ASP.Net applications and I'm wondering what kind of things can be done to integrate with SharePoint to make a more seamless environment? We put documentation and production move requests and so on in SharePoint now, but it pretty much feels like it's own separate system rather than an integrated tool on our intranet.
I've searched around to see what other people are doing with SharePoint but I've been finding a lot of useless information.
A great idea for you would be move your most used asp.net apps to run within the SharePoint site. Each app can be added either as a control directly on a pagelayout or integrated into a webpart (use the webpart to load child controls).
This would allow you to use the flexible moss interface to move the asp.net app into a unified information architecture so people can find the app easily.
SharePoint is really easy to roll out something that works, but creating a seamless intranet does require a bit of thinking outside of SharePoint itself (i.e. what should go where, which users need to see what, navigation structure...)
That is really a lot of work and requires lots of input from people outside the IT area.
A typical intranet portal segments functionality by department. Each department will probably have some custom web-based apps that you might have historically implemented in ASP.Net, and linked to from the intranet portal. With sharepoint you can start bringing the useful bits of those custom web-apps in as modular parts, so that the business owner of the portal can have more control as to how information is structured and displayed to his/her users.
Think dashboards, populated with custom metrics that only make sense to individual departments. That's one of the most obvious places to start. HR, accounting, IT, they all have metrics they want to track and display. They all have legacy systems that they might want to correlate information from. All this can be done in reusable web-parts. Since Sharepoint gives the end-user the control over layout, display, audience control, etc, you don't end up reinventing wheels all day.
SharePoint was designed to be a collaboration portal and document repository. If you have other business processes wrapped up in other internal web sites, you may not get much benefit from converting these sites into SharePoint sub-sites.
However, if there is signifcant overlap in your applications (contact lists, inventory, specs, etc.) you may want to make the investment to combine.
If you have InfoPath, you can create online forms. You can share your docs and edit them online. You can start an approvement workflow on these docs. You can create polls. You can create work groups.
Basically SharePoint is a giant and robust document store, but you can do anything what you can do in any ASP.NET web application. You can create e.g. custom workflows to automate business processes. We've worked for several customers to create corporate intranets and sometimes internet sites, so it really works. :)
But sometimes it's very hard to implement the requested features (a lot of workarounds).
Really its an intranet in a box. We pretty much run all of our day to day development tasks off of it. We keep documentation, track defects, manage people's time off etc. You can migrate your asp.net and asp applications to run under the sharepoint site. In the adminstration section you can set up web applications to run under the same site, but outside of sharepoint's control. That would probably help with the "feel" of it being completely seperate.
Sharepoint is really a shift in the way people have to think about web development and that's the key. You're no longer developing a standalone application, you're adding on to an existing framework. I would put it akin to having "silos of data" vs. a centralized database system which houses all the company's data. Once people realize that everything is connected, it will feel more like a seemless integration. My advice is to actively try and create applications in sharepoint and think about how to migrate existing apps on to it.
How about BI and reporting from an ERP?
When we know IE is uncapable to handle a page with 10000 table rows (without pagination)
Many don't realize but the success of a reporting tool depends on the performance of the grid object used - Excel and the SpreadSheet obj from the defunct Office Web Components are still the #1 in user's (accountants, managers, ceo) choice.
I think it depends on your environment. In our environment, we setup each department with their own pages and we use it for basic information, surveys, and the employee's homepage. We've built Google/Live Search and Weather.com widgets and roll RSS feeds using Tim Huer's RSS control.
One thing you can do is to create web parts to provide access to data from existing applications. Initially they could simply be read-only views, but depending on your experience they could be fleshed out to allow writes.
Another idea is to add links between SharePoint and your applications (assuming they're web based); that will at least allow a flow between them.
I haven't done it, but you could also theoretically skin SharePoint to look like the rest of your intranet.
Create libraries
Form libraries, documents libraries, slide libraries
Create standard or custom lists
Standard lists - announcements, tasks, contacts
Custom lists - suppliers, contractors, inventories, orders
Setup secure team discussion areas
Build shared team calendars
Create simple workflow processes on documents and lists