[development] lightbox module comparison

[Konstantin Käfer]

I'd like to mention that Stella has (supposedly) mailed the  
maintainers of all mentioned modules to review the article and point  
out mistakes/explain allegedly missing features etc. I think it is  
very important to give module maintainers the chance to do also for  
future comparisons; so when you're planning to do your own module  
shootout, please consider this.

Konstantin

On 05.06.2008, at 00:48, Stella Power wrote:

> Well I plan on keeping the lightbox comparison page up to date,  
> hopefully with some updates from the individual module maintainers.   
> It's also why I have a "Last Updated" bit at the top of the  
> comparison, so people reading it can see exactly how recent it is.   
> I also have a date beside each module in the first overview table to  
> show when the info on that particular module was last updated.
>
> Cheers,
> Stella
>
> On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 11:42 PM, Larry Garfield <larry at garfieldtech.com 
> > wrote:
>
> I agree that these comparison pages are very valuable; no question.   
> However, one problem with them is that they are also time- 
> sensitive.  I don't expect any of the modules mentioned to stand  
> still.  That means much of the data is going to become outdated;  
> some in a month, some in 6 months.  Are we also committing to  
> keeping these pages up to date?  Out of date/wrong documentation can  
> be just as bad if not worse than no documentation at all.
>
> --Larry Garfield the killjoy
>
> On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 20:21:54 +0100, "Stella Power" <stella at stellapower.net 
> > wrote:
> > I added one to the lightbox2 module page too.
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 10:05 AM, Richard Burford <
> > rich at freestylesystems.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >> Agreed. A link from each module page to the comparison would be  
> good a
> > good
> >> addition. I'll add one for Shadowbox now.
> >>
> >> psynaptic
> >> http://freestylesystems.co.uk
> >> http://api.freestylesystems.co.uk
> >>
> >>
> >> On 4 Jun 2008, at 02:25, Karen Stevenson wrote:
> >>
> >>  I think a 'module comparisons' section is important enough to  
> deserve a
> >>> top-level place in the handbook, with a link from the downloads  
> page to
> > make
> >>> it easy for someone looking for modules to find. I actually think
> > writeups
> >>> like this are far more useful that the contrib module rating  
> system
> > that is
> >>> often discussed. What does a 5 star rating tell you? It tells  
> you the
> > module
> >>> solved a specific problem for the person who rated it, it  
> doesn't tell
> > you
> >>> if it will solve *your* problem or be useful in *your*  
> situation. But
> > this
> >>> kind of writeup makes it easy to see which module is the best  
> fit for
> > your
> >>> particular situation, which is really really useful.
> >>>
> >>> This should not be buried down in the module documentation --  
> someone
> >>> looking at one of the other modules would never see it. It  
> should be
> > very
> >>> prominent (and that hopefully would also encourage other people  
> to add
> > more
> >>> of these kinds of comparisons).
> >>>
> >>> For instance a good comparison of the different wysiwyg editors  
> would
> > be
> >>> pretty useful :)
> >>>
> >>> Karen
> >>>
> >>> ----- Original Message ----
> >>> From: FGM <fgm at osinet.fr>
> >>> To: development at drupal.org
> >>> Sent: Tuesday, June 3, 2008 10:27:32 AM
> >>> Subject: Re: [development] lightbox module comparison
> >>>
> >>> I've done one on the two glossary modules I'm aware of  
> (glossary.module
> >>> and
> >>> g2.module), it's on the g2 project page. Maybe there are more,  
> though ?
> >>>
> >>> This being said, you might have something: module duplication and
> > module
> >>> voting being recurrent themes, it might make sense to formalize  
> a rule
> >>> like:
> >>> "if you're doing a module that resembles other modules, create a
> >>> comparison
> >>> page, that will go in the <to be determined> section of the  
> handbook",
> > in
> >>> the dev manual.
> >>>
> >>> What do you think of it ?
> >>>
> >>> FGM
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>