XOOPS 
Forum
Forum Index General Forums Community Support Modules Support Themes Support Development International Support Module Hack Reviews Theme Designer Talk
  1. Board index / 
  2. General XOOPS.org forums / 
  3. File repository - Maintenance 
  4.  / Repository: Rules discussion
Register
21
carnuke
Re: Repository: Rules discussion

  • 2007/4/23 13:21

  • carnuke

  • Home away from home

  • Posts: 1955

  • Since: 2003/11/5


With regards to the recent published list of acceptance/ rejections of modules for the new repository:

Were the module developers whose module failed the criteria informed that they would be excluded prior to publication?

Are some of these just 'silly mistakes' that could have been easily corrected, before posting rejection lists here?
hhttp://houseofstrauss.co.uk Resource for alternative health and holistic lifestyle
search xoops
22
instantzero
Re: Repository: Rules discussion

Our modules will not be listed just because of 2 or 3 #oops# points !

We are not judged on the quality but on the fact that :

1/ We don't have a licence file inside our modules (when it's not required AND when EACH Php script as a recall to the GPL licence)
2/ Because the archive's name of our modules does not begin with "xoops2" ???
3/ Because there is a ".project" file in our modules when some other modules write some hidden texts in ALL of YOUR pages .... ??????

Where is the "logic" ?



[Edit by bender]Posting transfered from another thread which was not for discussion.

Please note that in my opinion this is based on a missunderstand. (see next post)

le="color: #000000"><?php [quote] Bender wrote: [b][u]Rejected due to files missing[/u][/b] [b]Boox 1.1[/b] [url=http://www.instant-zero.com/]home[/url] [url=http://xoops.instant-zero.com/modules/mydownloads/visit.php?cid=10&lid=9]dl[/url] --- [i]REASON: [color=cc3300]License file[/color]; SIDENOTE: Eclipse projectfile, filename xoops2_[/i] [b]iSearch 1.6[/b] [url=http://www.instant-zero.com/]home[/url] [url=http://xoops.instant-zero.com/modules/mydownloads/singlefile.php?cid=8&lid=6]dl[/url] --- [i]REASON: [color=cc3300]License file[/color]; SIDENOTE: Eclipse projectfile, filename xoops2_[/i] [b]Marquee 2.42[/b] [url=http://www.instant-zero.com/]home[/url] [url=http://xoops.instant-zero.com/xoops/marquee.zip]dl[/url] --- [i]REASON: [color=cc3300]License file[/color]; SIDENOTE: Eclipse projectfile, filename xoops2_[/i] [b]MyIframe 1.4[/b] [url=http://www.instant-zero.com/]home[/url] [url=http://xoops.instant-zero.com/modules/mydownloads/singlefile.php?cid=6&lid=4]dl[/url] --- [i]REASON: [color=cc3300]License file[/color]; SIDENOTE: Eclipse projectfile, filename xoops2_[/i] [b]NewBBex 1.4[/b] [url=http://www.instant-zero.com/]home[/url] [url=http://xoops.instant-zero.com/modules/mydownloads/singlefile.php?cid=4&lid=2]dl[/url] --- [i]REASON: [color=cc3300]License file[/color]; SIDENOTE: Eclipse projectfile, filename xoops2_[/i] [b]News[/b] [url=http://www.instant-zero.com/]home[/url] [url=http://xoops.instant-zero.com/modules/mydownloads/singlefile.php?cid=2&lid=8]dl[/url] --- [i]REASON: [color=cc3300]License file[/color]; SIDENOTE: Eclipse projectfile, filename xoops2_[/i] [b]Shortcuts 1.4[/b] [url=http://www.instant-zero.com/]home[/url] [url=http://xoops.instant-zero.com/modules/mydownloads/singlefile.php?cid=7&lid=5]dl[/url] --- [i]REASON: [color=cc3300]License file[/color]; SIDENOTE: Eclipse projectfile, filename xoops2_[/i] [b]Userpage 1.21[/b] [url=http://www.instant-zero.com/]home[/url] [url=http://xoops.instant-zero.com/modules/mydownloads/visit.php?cid=3&lid=1]dl[/url] --- [i]REASON: [color=cc3300]License file[/color]; SIDENOTE: Eclipse projectfile, filename xoops2_[/i] [b]XoopsCare 1.0[/b] [url=http://www.instant-zero.com/]home[/url] [url=http://xoops.instant-zero.com/modules/mydownloads/visit.php?cid=12&lid=27]dl[/url] --- [i]REASON: [color=cc3300]License file, readme[/color]; SIDENOTE: Eclipse projectfile, filename xoops2_[/i] [/quote] YEAHH !!!! STRIKE ... :-) Thank you VERY MUCH, 100% of our products are rejected :-o 8-) :lol: What an [b]excellent[/b] news isn't it ? ;-) Just tell me ... Do you still list XOOPS 1 modules ? No ? So do I. Do you see a new XOOPS version except than a 2.0.x declared as stable ? No ? So do I. Can you download a new version of XOOPS ? No ? So do I. Ok, one point is clear Now concerning the licence file ... hum... do you really know the GPL licence, also called the "virus licence" ? In short, everything made for a product with a GPL licence [b]IS ALSO in GPL licence[/b] ... ok, another point clear. The "sidenotes" .... Hummm ... [quote] SIDENOTE: Eclipse projectfile, [/quote] In what it's a sidenote or a problem ? Have you thought to "sidenote" the "thumbs.db" files too ??? [quote] filename xoops2_ [/quote] See my first point, XOOPS 1 is dead and we don't have anything else than XOOPS 2.0.x ... PS : A [b]REALLY[/b] sidenote, those modules who include some hidden texts in their output ;-)



*** EDIT ***
Thank you VERY MUCH for removing AND censoring our posts.
thank you
Here is our original post, for the "records".


[Edit by Bender] So where exactly is the difference between that screenshot and the text above? I did not remove a word so what are you talking about?
However you originally posted in a thread which has a big disclaimer that everything posted there will be removed. Instead of deleting it i copied it over here.
23
Bender
Re: Repository: Rules discussion

  • 2007/4/23 13:44

  • Bender

  • Home away from home

  • Posts: 1899

  • Since: 2003/3/10


STOP

Before you go out and kill me for simple stuff that stops a module from being listed:

Please read carefully. The first posting in the thread modules list explains exactly what that is about. With Marco i even talked about the license files and he knows that whats mentioned in sidenotes was never planned for the requirements so please don´t jump the gun.

To clarify: Things listed as Reson: are mandatory. So those are highlighted in red. Things listed as sidenote are just that ... a "sidenote" to inform the author of things i have seen just along the lines when looking at the archive. So whether these are fixed or not is left to the author.

Anything listed under sidenote will not prevent anything from being added.


@carnuke:

some i have gotten around to inform about missing licenses like Instant Zero ... some i haven´t yet. But that will be taken care of for those i did not talk to yet.


Finally i changed the wording from "Rejected" to "Not yet accepted". So everyone relax
Sorry, this signature is experiencing technical difficulties. We will return you to the sheduled signature as soon as possible ...
24
giba
Re: Repository: Rules discussion

  • 2007/4/23 14:00

  • giba

  • Just can't stay away

  • Posts: 638

  • Since: 2003/4/26


Resized Image
25
Anonymous
Re: Repository: Rules discussion

  • 2007/4/23 15:27

  • Anonymous

  • Posts: 0

  • Since:


Quote:
Bender wrote:

Finally i changed the wording from "Rejected" to "Not yet accepted". So everyone relax


Ah, good

I just popped into this thread to make that very suggestion. Honest

How about special dispensation for IZ stuff - pretty daft to exclude the News module, eh?

@Bender:
I don't know what needs doing with regards to the Repository or, indeed, who has volunteered for which tasks, but if there's anything that needs doing which doesn't involve coding, i.e. checking modules for missing files, etc, then please let me know.

I've moaned about the Repository often enough so its only right that I offer some help
26
AndyM
Re: Repository: Rules discussion

  • 2007/4/23 16:46

  • AndyM

  • Quite a regular

  • Posts: 296

  • Since: 2003/8/31


I don't want to tread over old ground again, but I really do think that not including beta/rc releases is a mistake. There are many perfectly usable modules out there that are still in beta or RC status (for whatever reason).

Bender (I think it was) did say authors can use the news module to announce them, but the problem with that is that not everyone checks the news regularly and go straight to the repository looking for modules, without using the search function.

Personally, I think each category should have a "beta modules" sub category, with appropriate notices, then leave the decision up to the visitor whether or not they are willing to use a beta/RC module.

It may mean a bit more work for maintainers, but it would help centralise the modules a bit more, and help save people having to Google for modules as much, which I have seen quite a few people moan about.
27
snow77
Re: Repository: Rules discussion

  • 2007/4/23 16:46

  • snow77

  • Just can't stay away

  • Posts: 864

  • Since: 2003/7/23


a few points of view...

ref #9
Quote:

- naming convention: rules for naming a XOOPS module mod_x2.0/2/3/all_name_version.ext
- module structure: the downloaded archive extracts to htdocs/modules/modulename folder (similar to the XOOPS core distro), including a docs/ folder and the full paths to the module folder
- versioning: in the repository, please use one entry per module, not per module version. This means updating a module entry when a newer version is released.
- language files: added to the module package (high maintenance) or as separate downloads (where?)

And these:
- reviews of modules (each month a new module review?)
- tested or not
- central download location or decentralised
- module packs


Naming convention and file structure of the zip: let the authors decide how they want it, there's already tons of modules in final stages without this and I find it kind of hard for the developers to go back and repackage them.

(it doesn't mean it would be wrong to do this or that things can't be changed, just a another opinion)

Reviews: maybe the news team can help with this
Testing: As long as the modules don't make big hacks to the core they will be available for testing at the demo site, this could be a good playground for testing.
Central download location or decentralised: it's the decision of the author where he wants his work to be downloaded from.
Module packs: David was interested in doing something like this, maybe he's interested in retaking this category in addons, but there most be a great control of keeping them updated.
Language files: maybe create a new category for this?

License: does that really have to be mandatory?

ref #21
Quote:

I think modules that do not state XOOPS version, PHP and MySQL version and a PHP 'register_globals' setting should carry a warning in big red letters until someone (ideally the developer) has clarified exactly what is needed to make their module work. I am confident this would save thousands of unneccessary forum posts.


I'm concerned about the descriptions, like those modules that work only with PHP5 and other more technical stuff, that only the module author knows well about and that the people who are writing the descriptions might not be aware about this.

Finding the right place for the alpha's, and the un-supported modules would be good to discuss more. If left as news articles they risk of being left forgotten when someone might be interested in retaking them.

Do you have any special plans for theme submissions?
28
Peekay
Re: Repository: Rules discussion

  • 2007/4/23 19:26

  • Peekay

  • XOOPS is my life!

  • Posts: 2335

  • Since: 2004/11/20


Personally, I would dump the downloads module completely and make use of the software used by the module dev forge. It enables users to:

1) Read detailed module descriptions.
2) Read detailed documentation.
3) Read news items from the module developer.
4) Download 'alpha', 'beta' and 'final' versions from one location.
5) Submit bug reports using a structured bug-reporting feature.
6) Track bug reports (for those devs that are supporting their module).
7) Post questions in module-specific forums.
8) Submit feature requests.
9) Respond to surveys set up by the module developer.
10) See a list of active and recent projects.

I don't see why the 'project list' folder structure, which is currently based on project status, could not be based on e.g. 'News', 'Calendars' etc.

A great bit of software IMHO. If it was available as a module, that would be my description
A thread is for life. Not just for Christmas.
29
gtop00
Re: Repository: Rules discussion

  • 2007/4/23 21:09

  • gtop00

  • Friend of XOOPS

  • Posts: 498

  • Since: 2004/11/13


Quote:

Peekay wrote:
Personally, I would dump the downloads module completely and make use of the software used by the module dev forge. It enables users to:
...

YES! This is an excellent approach. There is not any reason to re-invent the wheel

What is only missing? A live demo of the module.
30
tom
Re: Repository: Rules discussion

  • 2007/4/23 21:22

  • tom

  • Friend of XOOPS

  • Posts: 1359

  • Since: 2002/9/21


Quote:

gtop00 wrote:
Quote:

Peekay wrote:
Personally, I would dump the downloads module completely and make use of the software used by the module dev forge. It enables users to:
...

YES! This is an excellent approach. There is not any reason to re-invent the wheel


I disagree, not every module developer wants to maintain their work on the XOOPS site, some including Instant Zero prefer to offer support from their own websites, which has many benefits, one of them include the ad's revenue they receive for doing their work free.

It would be time consuming for these developers support two sites at once.

If they choose to only offer support from their own site, this could be unanswered questions, and bug submits

The repository is and should be just a simple place to dump the latest release, and allow members to download and review.

Personal opinion of course.
« 1 2 (3) 4 »

Post Reply

      
4 + 7 = ?  
Input the result from the expression
Maximum attempts you can try: 10
* = Required

Search

Advanced Search

Recent Posts

Who's Online

214 user(s) are online (163 user(s) are browsing Support Forums)

Members: 0

Guests: 214

more...

Donat-O-Meter

Stats
Goal: $15.00
Due Date: Jul 31
Gross Amount: $0.00
Net Balance: $0.00
Left to go: $15.00
Make donations with PayPal!

Latest GitHub Commits