At 05:45 AM 3/11/2009, Ivan Sergio Borgonovo wrote:
What I'd find useful would be - better categorisation system and better search system on categories
Big +1 on that.
- a flag to check if a module provides an API or is just an application - an activity index (average lines of code changed/time) - a issue queue index
Regular +1 on those.
Maybe we could let people (other than the maintainers) to "categorise" the project.
Best idea I've heard yet. Ivan, I want to have a beer with you.
I really don't see duplication as a problem.
Ditto. In fact I appreciate it. It's finding the one you need that is the problem. The way I see it, this problem requires a taxonomical/navigational solution, not a paradigm shift in methodology. It would have to be an ongoing task/project in its own right, but IMHO it's one that could easily be supported by less-than-hardcore developers. LVX TF --- As If Productions http://www.asifproductions.com Interactive Worlds and Immersive Obsessions
Maybe we could let people (other than the maintainers) to "categorise" the project.
Put "tags" to categorise, to the module that have more than one category.. And limit to 3 or 5 tags per module.. On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 2:41 PM, As If Productions < everyone@asifproductions.com> wrote:
At 05:45 AM 3/11/2009, Ivan Sergio Borgonovo wrote:
What I'd find useful would be - better categorisation system and better search system on categories
Big +1 on that.
- a flag to check if a module provides an API or is just an application
- an activity index (average lines of code changed/time) - a issue queue index
Regular +1 on those.
Maybe we could let people (other than the maintainers) to "categorise" the
project.
Best idea I've heard yet. Ivan, I want to have a beer with you.
I really don't see duplication as a problem.
Ditto. In fact I appreciate it. It's finding the one you need that is the problem. The way I see it, this problem requires a taxonomical/navigational solution, not a paradigm shift in methodology. It would have to be an ongoing task/project in its own right, but IMHO it's one that could easily be supported by less-than-hardcore developers.
LVX TF
--- As If Productions http://www.asifproductions.com Interactive Worlds and Immersive Obsessions
-- ------------------------------------- Marco Sousa
I can only say that I agreed heartily to this response: As If Productions schrieb:
Ditto. In fact I appreciate it. It's finding the one you need that is the problem. The way I see it, this problem requires a taxonomical/navigational solution, not a paradigm shift in methodology. It would have to be an ongoing task/project in its own right, but IMHO it's one that could easily be supported by less-than-hardcore developers.
LVX TF
I apologize for shamelessly promoting my one proposal over the mailinglist, but actually, I believe that use-cases (see my proposal at http://drupal.org/node/397280 ) could - together with a nice searching solution - solve this problem. Why? Because use-cases would present a "you want this, you need that"-way of viewing modules, not some "I give you xyz" like modules do. And use-cases could be moderated/developed by "use-case-developers" not "module-developers". Why is this an advantage? A use-case-developer would need to think more like a designer then like a developer. And every developer likes *his* way of developing (for sometimes very good reasons). The result is, that we have multiple modules solving the same problem (in different ways). Thats wonderful! It's allows for evolution of modules (evolution never works with just one set, you need multiplicity). Nevertheless: Use-cases could select *one* of those modules/combinations and promote it. When (someday) another module is better, use-cases could change. Perhaps there are multiple use-cases solving a given problem. So what? As long as they present nice "what you get"/"when to choose this use-case" its still easier to decide.. -- Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best regards / Saludos cordiales *Sebastian Nerz* ___________________________________________ *Orestes* Eduard-Spranger-Str. 56 D-72076 Tuebingen - Deutschland Of. : +49-7071-56519-30 - Fax : +49-7071-56519-31 www.orestes-sol.com <http://www.orestes-sol.com/> s.nerz@orestes-sol.com <mailto:s.nerz@orestes-sol.com> ___________________________________________
Hi, I totally agree with Ivan Sergio Borgonovo, As If Productions, and some others on this issue. Duplication is not such a problem; it is the lack of useful categorization (module relation, similarity) and lack of efficient searching that leads to time wasting. 1) I used to use the long page with all modules and search using CTRL+F in it. That kind of worked for me - I could find related modules, and then read about them in tabs. But since the long page is broken by pagination, I am lost. The categories are unhelpful, as is the module search tool. Most of the time I find related modules by Google site search, but that's inefficient as well. Hence: let's aim for better categorization (by maintainers AND the module users), without limiting the tag count, and for a high-quality search (maybe autocomplete would be helpful). 2) Duplication means diversity and that means evolution. Even if it hurts and takes time, I am sure it is the best. In the process of testing prospective modules, we often discover exciting facets of them, and by communicating with maintainers we may help some of the projects flourish in unexpected directions. I would never trust any approval seals. Even download counts are more useful than any seal, IMHO. (I am imagining a large ToughGraph or suchlike map of Drupal modules, with all sorts of groupings and color-coded relations, with explanations on mouse-touch, etc., that might be lovely for the module jungle exploration!) Cheers, Tomáš (vacilando) -- Tomáš J. Fülöpp Tomi@vacilando.org http://vacilando.net On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 14:41, As If Productions < everyone@asifproductions.com> wrote:
At 05:45 AM 3/11/2009, Ivan Sergio Borgonovo wrote:
What I'd find useful would be - better categorisation system and better search system on categories
Big +1 on that.
- a flag to check if a module provides an API or is just an application
- an activity index (average lines of code changed/time) - a issue queue index
Regular +1 on those.
Maybe we could let people (other than the maintainers) to "categorise" the
project.
Best idea I've heard yet. Ivan, I want to have a beer with you.
I really don't see duplication as a problem.
Ditto. In fact I appreciate it. It's finding the one you need that is the problem. The way I see it, this problem requires a taxonomical/navigational solution, not a paradigm shift in methodology. It would have to be an ongoing task/project in its own right, but IMHO it's one that could easily be supported by less-than-hardcore developers.
LVX TF
--- As If Productions http://www.asifproductions.com Interactive Worlds and Immersive Obsessions
If only there was a drupal.org redesign process people could get involved with on the groups site. I mean how neat would that be? I think I've read something about that somewhere. Maybe on one of the get-involved pages.... perhaps on a front page posting... I am not sure. Steven Peck On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 8:02 AM, Tomáš Fülöpp (vacilando.org) <tomi@vacilando.org> wrote:
Hi,
I totally agree with Ivan Sergio Borgonovo, As If Productions, and some others on this issue. Duplication is not such a problem; it is the lack of useful categorization (module relation, similarity) and lack of efficient searching that leads to time wasting.
1) I used to use the long page with all modules and search using CTRL+F in it. That kind of worked for me - I could find related modules, and then read about them in tabs. But since the long page is broken by pagination, I am lost. The categories are unhelpful, as is the module search tool. Most of the time I find related modules by Google site search, but that's inefficient as well. Hence: let's aim for better categorization (by maintainers AND the module users), without limiting the tag count, and for a high-quality search (maybe autocomplete would be helpful).
2) Duplication means diversity and that means evolution. Even if it hurts and takes time, I am sure it is the best. In the process of testing prospective modules, we often discover exciting facets of them, and by communicating with maintainers we may help some of the projects flourish in unexpected directions. I would never trust any approval seals. Even download counts are more useful than any seal, IMHO. (I am imagining a large ToughGraph or suchlike map of Drupal modules, with all sorts of groupings and color-coded relations, with explanations on mouse-touch, etc., that might be lovely for the module jungle exploration!)
Cheers,
Tomáš (vacilando)
-- Tomáš J. Fülöpp Tomi@vacilando.org http://vacilando.net
On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 14:41, As If Productions <everyone@asifproductions.com> wrote:
At 05:45 AM 3/11/2009, Ivan Sergio Borgonovo wrote:
What I'd find useful would be - better categorisation system and better search system on categories
Big +1 on that.
- a flag to check if a module provides an API or is just an application - an activity index (average lines of code changed/time) - a issue queue index
Regular +1 on those.
Maybe we could let people (other than the maintainers) to "categorise" the project.
Best idea I've heard yet. Ivan, I want to have a beer with you.
I really don't see duplication as a problem.
Ditto. In fact I appreciate it. It's finding the one you need that is the problem. The way I see it, this problem requires a taxonomical/navigational solution, not a paradigm shift in methodology. It would have to be an ongoing task/project in its own right, but IMHO it's one that could easily be supported by less-than-hardcore developers.
LVX TF
--- As If Productions http://www.asifproductions.com Interactive Worlds and Immersive Obsessions
participants (5)
-
As If Productions -
Marco Sousa -
Sebastian Nerz -
Steven Peck -
Tomáš Fülöpp (vacilando.org)