Topic: New Modsite Ideas :D (Read 77303 times)

mooncup · « **Reply #50 on:** April 23, 2009, 06:11:24 PM »

Multiple modules with the same name is fine. I presume there is actually something blocking them on the current site, unless module name is a key field.

I still like the idea of being able to actively fork existing modules, so I'm going to have a play with that. Maybe have the first module with each name a certain colour to show its the original (these colours are going to be key methinks).

Charles Kingsley · « **Reply #51 on:** April 23, 2009, 06:12:58 PM »

So maybe not a rewrite?

mooncup · « **Reply #52 on:** April 23, 2009, 06:15:30 PM »

Well I haven't seen the current code yet - I have no idea what I'm working with.

Amanda Folson · « **Reply #53 on:** April 23, 2009, 06:16:34 PM »

Of the storing procedure no - however I think we would benefit from redoing the UI.

Charles Kingsley · « **Reply #54 on:** April 23, 2009, 06:16:38 PM »

That was aimed towards Amanda.

Charles Kingsley · « **Reply #55 on:** April 23, 2009, 06:17:07 PM »

Quote from: Amanda F. on April 23, 2009, 06:16:34 PM

Of the storing procedure now - however I think we would benefit from redoing the UI.

Small tweaks such as the Search/Browse would be easy enough to implement as would CSS colours by group?

Amanda Folson · « **Reply #56 on:** April 23, 2009, 06:19:57 PM »

Well no, we're talking about changing how most of these things work...I'm not sure it would be wise to hack at something that's already a hack if that makes sense.

Charles Kingsley · « **Reply #57 on:** April 23, 2009, 06:24:16 PM »

The current site isn't a hack; just under developed.

a SWOT analysis should be carried out of the whole shooting match once we know what people beyond us three want.

Amanda Folson · « **Reply #58 on:** April 23, 2009, 06:27:20 PM »

Well yes I agree...cuz that pretty much determines whether we burn and start over or not. However we're hammering out some good ideas so I'm content to keep talking to the two of you

mooncup · « **Reply #59 on:** April 23, 2009, 06:31:12 PM »

I feel so loved.

Can we implement a code view too? So that people can veiw the source with nice colours + commenting before downloading.

I like the way irssi does it:

http://scripts.irssi.org/

They let you view the sources like this:

http://scripts.irssi.org/html/8-ball.pl.html

It has nice links to each sub and is generally pretty.

Then if you like it you can download directly like this: http://scripts.irssi.org/scripts/8-ball.pl

Amanda Folson · « **Reply #60 on:** April 23, 2009, 06:51:55 PM »

Hmm, yeah I like that idea. I've been able to view the code in browser but i suspect that's browser-side.

Charles Kingsley · « **Reply #61 on:** April 24, 2009, 08:48:43 AM »

I suspect that would be straight forward enough to do.

A bit like we offer with Doxy? http://www.anope.org/doxy/1.9/d7/d13/configreader_8h-source.html

mooncup · « **Reply #62 on:** April 24, 2009, 11:07:28 AM »

Quote from: Charles Kingsley on April 24, 2009, 08:48:43 AM

I suspect that would be straight forward enough to do.

A bit like we offer with Doxy? http://www.anope.org/doxy/1.9/d7/d13/configreader_8h-source.html

yep

Fersure · « **Reply #63 on:** April 24, 2009, 03:39:24 PM »

Another thing that Irssi's script site offers that would be nice is the ability for authors to specify that licence they use with the module. And as I said in #anope, decent version control software implemented into the site would be nice too. i.e.: svn or git.

Amanda Folson · « **Reply #64 on:** April 24, 2009, 03:41:53 PM »

Well, the parts of Anope you use in the module are GPLv2 - you can't change th license on those. However anything YOU create can be licensed under whatever you want.

Fersure · « **Reply #65 on:** April 24, 2009, 03:50:13 PM »

Well yes, that's what I mean.

MikeXIII · « **Reply #66 on:** April 24, 2009, 04:01:51 PM »

Modules Watch List
So you know when updates are made to things you've installed, preferably email notification so you don't have to login and check every now and again because that sort of defeats the purpose.

Fersure · « **Reply #67 on:** April 24, 2009, 04:06:40 PM »

sounds like a nice idea.

mooncup · « **Reply #68 on:** April 24, 2009, 04:20:40 PM »

I like that idea - maybe rss?

Amanda Folson · « **Reply #69 on:** April 24, 2009, 04:22:20 PM »

Well, we have rss, but it's hard to pull information out of. That's one of the things that needs fixing.

mooncup · « **Reply #70 on:** April 24, 2009, 05:02:41 PM »

And maybe an anope module that checks for updated modules?

I could code something clientside that made xmls of date last updated, and Rob could make an anope module that parses it and notifies opers

Amanda Folson · « **Reply #71 on:** April 24, 2009, 05:07:09 PM »

Yeah but that essentially freezes Anope until it gets a response. I'm not big on connecting to external sources :S

mooncup · « **Reply #72 on:** April 24, 2009, 09:33:12 PM »

Can't it have its own thread?

Amanda Folson · « **Reply #73 on:** April 24, 2009, 10:19:13 PM »

I never had much luck with that, but Rob said he's done it so poke him maybe? Not an issue atm though...we need more ideas.

Jan Milants · « **Reply #74 on:** April 28, 2009, 05:00:20 PM »

just a short list:

- a way for users to submit translations to module authors
- the ability to have multiple versions of the same module.. basically allow module authors to post dev versions or RCs. With the current implementation they practically hide previous releases. The same applies to having one version for 1.8 and one for 1.9 or eventually 2.0..
- The ability to report bugs in a module..
- A more decent messaging system.. the current one drives me nuts. You don't know if it was actually send and even as admin i can't get a users email addy to send it manually

- the ability to post a comment without having to rate the module and vice versa..
- I would keep the QA approval and wouldn't mind reviewing some modules, but a set of guidelines needs to be published before that.. anyways, I don't think this was even properly implemented yet. Also make it so approval has to be granted again for a new major version of a module.
- by default hiding of modules that do not support the latest version of anope.
- possibly an option for an author to list modules (or certain versions) that are incompatible with a certain module.
- an option for supported IRCDs..
- idem for supported languages

News:

Author Topic: New Modsite Ideas :D (Read 77303 times)