I have a suggestion. I think outside of a very basic three or four modules (say forums, pm, extended profiles), modules should not be included. What should be instead is a list of modules and brief descriptions in the document ion, with the address of the Module Repository. Folks could then go the the repository and pick and chose just as I and many others did. Many of the modules suggested here, I do not use, but there are many others I do. Every site has different needs, and a simple list may be the best way to address those needs.

I like the XoopsForge pack a.k.a "the phppp pack"

Wordpress ( news, blog, etc.. )
CBB ( forums )
Article ( sections, articles .. and more )
Planet ( RSS )
Xlanguage ( multi-language)
MediaWiki ( powerfull wiki)

just add "Debaser" and you have a powerfull pack..

laterz !

I agree with the statement to not include modules into a XOOPS release, but when you look at the module repository (where the users can find the modules) it's fairly outdated. I also have the feeling the modules you find their aren't quality controled (everybody can add modules), although publicly displayed on the main XOOPS site, it can give a false feeling of securrity (hey I have donwloaded this modules from xoops, so I guess it's safe and secure)

Adding modules to the core releases XOOPS makes sure the modules are safe and sound.


mm,.,.difficult ;(

Xoops should be written for the complete newb in mind. This includes a simple page that says if you want to do this.. . then use this module etc! The simpler the better! No guess work.

don (el paso)

This is what I like to see... turning a complaint into some good suggestions.

Some interesting ideas here - my own would be to update Mith's module packs for 2.2 - with updated versions of each (for example WF-Download 3.1 etc)

However, I would also suggest that the installation script could also add locations for the relevent module types as well ... for example - pointing to download areas for news and content modules, download modules etc... as well as to authors of recommended ones.

The only limitation of packs is that some modules are more than capable of doing jobs of others... eg - although Hervet's News module is my own favourite for News, some people have used Phppp's "Article", or SmartFactory's "SmartSection" ... and we should really allow people the chance to try these out as well.

However - I'd suggest that people look at the original modules that Mith included - and perhaps see what they'd like to add to these?

But keep in mind, these packs would be inteded for newcomers to XOOPS - so keeping the amount of modules to a small number is perhaps the ideal solution.

(I'd also emphesise in the download that the user checks the relevent authors site before installing - in case an updated version has been released... whoever has the task of updating these packs can't always be aware of every update...)

An alternative idea - and perhaps an easier to maintain one - would be a simple list (with links) of suggested modules for different applications.

This could be linked to in the installation, and would in turn link to both the repository entries - and of course the authors homesite.

Although this would need some maintainance, it would be simpler than regularly updating a set of packs.

A bit OT: I would like to see an automatic update system for modules.

Theoretically it would go like this:

a) Central place for modules is a must to make this work. All developers should be "persuaded" to use d.x.o. for their modules or any other place.

b) Administration button "Check for updates". Script checks the current version of the installed modules with the version lying in the repository.

c) If newer, display the modules in a list so that you can select the modules to be updated.

d) Now the script FTPs the zip to your server, extract it and copies over the new/changed files.

e) After that an upgrade script will launched (or not) and/or the module is going to be updated.

Just a dream?

Quote:

Not a dream, I even begin to check my schedule :)

Quote:
I also like those modules but most of them are too complicated for a simple startup package. But they would fit well into a professional module pack. E.g. I don't think we would need a Wiki module in a startup package.

I agree that XoopsForge is a good source for modules, but why is it a different site? Why aren't those modules included here in the module repository? This is one of my main points. The modules are not easy to find for a newbie.

Quote:
Would be nice, but let's do one step after the other. First we need a working module repository that is free of all the outdated, unsupported stuff. Then this could be integrated by an automatic update procedure.

Quote:
This would be an option, but then the module repository has to be removed here, because otherwise people only get confused. The first "normal" thing for a visitor here would be to check a link called "module repository" when he is looking for a module.

However, such a list is - to my mind - only the second best option, because the links might get outdated, servers could be closed down and then there is no access to a module that still might work but could not be downloaded anymore. Having the modules here in the modules repository with somebody maintaing them is the best solution.

Quote:
Yawn... why does it always comes to sentences like that? Please accept that some people simply want to use Xoops. This - and the feedback they give is also an important part of the community. Of course - participating is always better, but not everybody has the time or the wish to do this but still can be interested when pointing to deficiencies in the current process.

If I want to participate more actively, I can just ask to get involved.

Quote:
Oh boy. No, you don't 'just want to use XOOPS, or you wouldn't have posted here. You want things to change in a certain way at a certain time, and you want to add your influence to the process of this change. But that is more then just using XOOPS. How many change requests have you sent to Microsoft about the office suite you're just using?

One of the deficiencies in the current process is that too many people just want to point things out, and too few people actually step up to fix them, one way or another. Benders remark clearly opened the door, and you yawn... well, it does show a degree of lazyness.

Herko