Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[enhancement] Development and production user interfaces #924

Closed
tonyfast opened this issue Nov 16, 2021 · 5 comments
Closed

[enhancement] Development and production user interfaces #924

tonyfast opened this issue Nov 16, 2021 · 5 comments
Labels
area: user experience 👩🏻‍💻 status: blocked ⛔️ This item is on hold due to another task type: enhancement 💅🏼 New feature or request

Comments

@tonyfast
Copy link
Contributor

Description

Currently the user interface uses some tools that improve the user experience, but there are more we can add. it would be nice to try different lab extensions before putting the into production. I am proposing at least two user interface images: the current prod version and a work in progress environment that we can use to add new features and test.

Value/benefit

currently, we can't change the user experience without impacting everyone. another development image would give us the freedom to provide an enhanced user interface without effecting the current services. i'd like to experiment with some of the collaborative tools we serve with hourhaus

this request builds off of ideas in #903 with adding different user interfaces to the qhub experience.

@tonyfast tonyfast added the type: enhancement 💅🏼 New feature or request label Nov 16, 2021
@pierrotsmnrd
Copy link
Contributor

pierrotsmnrd commented Nov 22, 2021

The fastest and easiest way I see to do so, is forking and deploying your own forks, as I did for some of my PRs. By having a personal deployment, we're free to experiment and research without any limitation. The drawback is that it implies a cost for the cloud provider.

Alternatively, we could imagine a sandbox.qhub.dev or alpha.qhub.dev or whatever, with its specific deploy repo, that we would use as a sandbox env for any experiment. The drawback here is the risk of collision if too much of us experiment at the same time.

I hope I understood the question right :)

@tonyfast
Copy link
Contributor Author

yea. i'm not going to find the time to setup my own qhub.

i am thinking that there qhub.dev/alpha or qhub.dev/sandbox. these endpoints would deploy a different on a different endpoint that allows for experimentation on production data. in this conformation, early adopters can try out new features and fall back the blessed user interface when problems arise.

@danlester
Copy link
Contributor

This can be part of a move to having JupyterLab images as more plug-and-play so you can easily switch in different images. Perhaps some of these ideas will help with this #1174 #1145
Ideally, people can work on JupyterLab config without understanding Docker at all.

@trallard trallard removed the needs: discussion 💬 Needs discussion with the rest of the team label Jan 12, 2023
@iameskild iameskild added the status: blocked ⛔️ This item is on hold due to another task label May 29, 2023
@pavithraes
Copy link
Member

We'll need to open an RFD to discuss the staging/production workflow.

@dcmcand
Copy link
Contributor

dcmcand commented Feb 8, 2024

JLab 4 allows users to install extensions by conda environments and with the addition of jhub-apps this is now possible in Nebari.

@dcmcand dcmcand closed this as completed Feb 8, 2024
@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this from TODO 📬 to Done 💪🏾 in 🪴 Nebari Project Management Feb 8, 2024
@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this from Needs Triage 🔍 to Done 💪🏾 in QHub Project Mangement 🚀 Feb 8, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area: user experience 👩🏻‍💻 status: blocked ⛔️ This item is on hold due to another task type: enhancement 💅🏼 New feature or request
Projects
Development

No branches or pull requests

7 participants