Explore - Carrier Summary to reflect all routers in TRs currently mapped

[Andrew-Clement]

See #35

[colinmccann]

In general, I'd suggest that we only do the minimum required on the old code base to get by, instead focusing our efforts on the new map page in the other repo. Unless this is essential for the Feb22 presentation, suggest we close

[Andrew-Clement]

Yes, I agree about focusing current efforts, but would like this issue to be kept in mind for the Map page re-dev. What is the best way in github for such a keep-in-mind-for-future flagging?

[colinmccann]

I agree about this need... perhaps @dcwalk could suggest something?

…

On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 4:06 AM, Andrew-Clement ***@***.***> wrote: Yes, I agree about focusing current efforts, but would like this issue to be kept in mind for the Map page re-dev. What is the best way in github for such a keep-in-mind-for-future flagging? — You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#36 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAuEmFHwk0FXJ8pWc8D5b6y_Wfq44A7Eks5re1G_gaJpZM4MGi3K> .

-- Colin

[dcwalk]

I'm really unclear here. It sounds like you want to keep a design decision in mind for the new design? I don't think this needs to be addressed via an issue. It needs to go wherever you have your design decisions documented? (If the mockups are that, then as a note on there?)

Obviously the new design is informed by the previous one, but to link them too closely limits the opportunities to revisit implementation decisions. aka--- my approach would be don't get too focused on issues with the previous interface when developing this new one, instead make sure the core goals are met and that design decisions are implemented.

Also I (strenuously) agree that work on the existing codebase should be minimized.

[colinmccann]

Further to this - we are about to undergo moving the explore code to the map page, and are therefore locking the ixmaps/website repo

…

On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 9:15 PM, dcwalk ***@***.***> wrote: I'm really unclear here. It sounds like you want to keep a design decision in mind for the new design? I don't think this needs to be addressed via an issue. It needs to go wherever you have your design decisions documented? (If the mockups are that do, then as a note on there?) Obviously the new design is informed by the previous one, but to link them too closely limits the opportunities to revisit implementation decisions. aka--- my approach would be don't get too focused on issues with the previous interface when developing this new one, instead make sure the core goals are met and that design decisions are implemented. Also I (strenuously) agree that work on the existing codebase should be minimized. — You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#36 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAuEmK1izrziQqVHUtkflei0dTQxjRgLks5rfEL0gaJpZM4MGi3K> .

-- Colin