digitalmars.D - dsource considered harmful
- Martin Carney <marcarn hotmail.com> Jan 18 2009
- dsimcha <dsimcha yahoo.com> Jan 18 2009
- Bill Baxter <wbaxter gmail.com> Jan 18 2009
- Stewart Gordon <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> Jan 18 2009
- jcc7 <technocrat7 gmail.com> Jan 20 2009
- BCS <none anon.com> Jan 18 2009
- "Simen Kjaeraas" <simen.kjaras gmail.com> Jan 18 2009
- Bill Baxter <wbaxter gmail.com> Jan 18 2009
- Tomas Lindquist Olsen <tomas.l.olsen gmail.com> Jan 22 2009
- Clay Smith <clayasaurus gmail.com> Jan 19 2009
Visiting dsource I'm disappointed by the large number of half-finished and not-started projects on the projects page. I pick on interesting project and look at the source tree - no files or years out of date. I think the unfinished, out-of-date and not-started projects should be moved to their own page - lets see the wood for the trees... mc
Jan 18 2009
== Quote from Martin Carney (marcarn hotmail.com)'s articleVisiting dsource I'm disappointed by the large number of half-finished and
I pick on interesting project and look at the source tree - no files or years
I think the unfinished, out-of-date and not-started projects should be moved to
mc
Or, an even simpler idea: Since these things are difficult to define and require human intervention, sort each project category by last checkin. The most active projects will be on the top, and the least active on the bottom.
Jan 18 2009
On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 3:56 AM, dsimcha <dsimcha yahoo.com> wrote:== Quote from Martin Carney (marcarn hotmail.com)'s articleVisiting dsource I'm disappointed by the large number of half-finished and
I pick on interesting project and look at the source tree - no files or years
I think the unfinished, out-of-date and not-started projects should be moved to
mc
Or, an even simpler idea: Since these things are difficult to define and require human intervention, sort each project category by last checkin. The most active projects will be on the top, and the least active on the bottom.
Getting a different ordering every time you look at the projects list would be annoying. But you could make an automatically pruned list that just omits any project that hasn't had an update in 6mos or so. The good thing is that DMD keeps changing so much that if a project hasn't been updated in that long, it probably doesn't compile. So the argument "it's not dead, just stable!" doesn't hold. Anyway I think Brad was working on this at one point. There were a bunch of ideas thrown around at least. My vote would be to get something simple up like you suggest. Keep the full list somewhere, but put a prominent link at the top pointing to another page that just lists the projects with activity in the last 6 months. Likewise on the "active" list put a link to the full list. --bb
Jan 18 2009
Bill Baxter wrote:On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 3:56 AM, dsimcha <dsimcha yahoo.com> wrote:
Or, an even simpler idea: Since these things are difficult to define and require human intervention, sort each project category by last checkin. The most active projects will be on the top, and the least active on the bottom.
Getting a different ordering every time you look at the projects list would be annoying. But you could make an automatically pruned list that just omits any project that hasn't had an update in 6mos or so.
As long as that automatically pruned list isn't the default. Otherwise, there would probably be lots of new projects started when it would be better to revive an existing project. Speaking of which, has anybody tried asking Brad for commit permission on an abandoned project in order to revive it? Stewart.
Jan 18 2009
jcc7 <technocrat7 gmail.com> == Quote from Stewart Gordon (smjg_1998 yahoo.com)'s article ...Speaking of which, has anybody tried asking Brad for commit permission on an abandoned project in order to revive it? Stewart.
I received commit permission on an abandoned project. (And then I abandoned the project, too--oops! At least I announced the abandonment on the project wiki, so people didn't have to dig into the source to see how fresh it was.) I think Brad's usual policy is to try to contact the original maintainer and then after a week or so to just grant commit permission to the new person if he doesn't hear an objection from the old maintainer. I haven't heard of any problems with malicious project hijacking, so I think the system works.
Jan 20 2009
Hello Bill,Getting a different ordering every time you look at the projects list would be annoying. But you could make an automatically pruned list that just omits any project that hasn't had an update in 6mos or so.
Yah, some sort of bucket sort would be better (active in the last week, month, 6 months, year, etc.)
Jan 18 2009
On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 23:11:15 +0100, Stewart Gordon <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> wrote:As long as that automatically pruned list isn't the default. Otherwise, there would probably be lots of new projects started when it would be better to revive an existing project.
Then have the list divided into two parts: on the top, the active projects, on the bottom (and explicitly marked as such), projects that have not been updated in a while. Simen
Jan 18 2009
On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 7:23 AM, Simen Kjaeraas <simen.kjaras gmail.com> wrote:On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 23:11:15 +0100, Stewart Gordon <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> wrote:As long as that automatically pruned list isn't the default. Otherwise, there would probably be lots of new projects started when it would be better to revive an existing project.
Then have the list divided into two parts: on the top, the active projects, on the bottom (and explicitly marked as such), projects that have not been updated in a while. Simen
Sounds reasonable to me. --bb
Jan 18 2009
--000e0cd29652953490046113d422 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 11:11 PM, Stewart Gordon <smjg_1998 yahoo.com>wrote:... Speaking of which, has anybody tried asking Brad for commit permission on an abandoned project in order to revive it? Stewart.
I took over the MinWin project a long time ago, since its author, Ben Hinkle, had disappeared from the community, I tried reviving it for about half a year, with some success, but eventually I got tired of doing it alone, with little to no testers/users. So it's pretty dead now again... -Tomas --000e0cd29652953490046113d422 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 11:11 PM, Stewar= t Gordon <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:smjg_1998 yahoo.com">smjg_= 1998 yahoo.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" s= tyle=3D"border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8e= x; padding-left: 1ex;"> ...<br> Speaking of which, has anybody tried asking Brad for commit permission on a= n abandoned project in order to revive it?<br><font color=3D"#888888"> <br> Stewart.<br> </font></blockquote></div><br>I took over the MinWin project a long time ag= o, since its author, Ben Hinkle, had disappeared from the community, I trie= d reviving it for about half a year, with some success, but eventually I go= t tired of doing it alone, with little to no testers/users.<br> So it's pretty dead now again...<br><br>-Tomas<br> --000e0cd29652953490046113d422--
Jan 22 2009
Martin Carney wrote:Visiting dsource I'm disappointed by the large number of half-finished and not-started projects on the projects page. I pick on interesting project and look at the source tree - no files or years out of date. I think the unfinished, out-of-date and not-started projects should be moved to their own page - lets see the wood for the trees... mc
I think there needs to be a feature so the project mods can mark their project as active or inactive. Those mods who aren't around, should be labeled as Potentially Inactive. Then they can be sorted by status, and no projects would appear inactive unless the project author specified. ~ Clay
Jan 19 2009