-
- 98 Posts
I'm not sure where to post this, so I'll post it here and one of the moderators can move it if necessary.
This is open source, and we're all human. "Stuff" happens. Our lives take twists and turns. We have good intentions, but are unable to complete a task or follow through. It's reality.
Knowing that, I would like to suggest that when someone wants to make an "Extra", that they find a partner. This shares the load, and allows one person to keep going while "stuff" happening may be stopping the other partner. I know it's easier to work solo. (I have worked as a developer both in teams and solo, and I know I prefer solo.) But look at the "Extras" that are buggy, half-finished, nearly-finished, very promising but just not ready for release yet... it is a problem that denigrates MODX reputation, and wastes the time of unsuspecting web developers that assume that a MODX "official" downloadable Extra will work.
Maybe the Extra developer met their own needs, and the community is clamoring for additional features, and the developer then tries, and fails...and then the development languishes or is abandoned entirely.
Whatever the reason for the problems, Extras (and new versions of Extras) that are not ready should not be offered to the community. So, in addition to the suggestion to take-on a partner in development to greatly increase the odds of completing the Extra, it would be great if there was a submission process, where volunteers could check out the Extra, and perhaps make recommendations as to the minimum features that have to be working before MODX will include the Extra in downloads.
I apologize if this comes off as a rant. The first Extra I tried does not work, and the author appears to have abandoned development. It has been extremely frustrating. I spent a lot of time trying to get it to work. I want to help MODX community, and I am not yet ready/skilled to help in development of either core code or in creating Extras, so what I am able to do right now is testing and suggestions.
Any other thoughts on protocol for Extra development, testing, and whether Extras should be required to be tested before including them in downloads?
Dennis Leahy
What extra did you try? There may be other more actively supported extras that do much the same thing. And it's not unusual for a community member to be interested in "orphaned" extras and take it on to further develop it.
-
- 98 Posts
mxCalendar 1.1.10-pl
..and I should add, it looks like a tremendous events calendar, when someone gets it working.
Dennis
Dennis,
Your plight is not unheard of. I don't think we can enforce a requirement for partnership. I think the best case is to employ ratings and reviews like you might see in the various book and application websites and marketplaces around the world. We do want to have the possibility for adoption for abandoned Extras as well we want to ensure that developers have links to their issues or an email. If extras are unsupported for x period of time, we may opt to put a warning on it. If people commented on it that it was no longer working, you'd know not to use it. If not corrected in short order we could ultimately remove it for abandonment.
On readiness, I think all we can do is create guidelines and enforce through the creation process with a combination of requirements and policy. With all the important work to be done inside the MODX company and in the community relating to documentation, events and etc. I don't know if people would be interested in reviewing Extras to see if they work before they can be published. In addition, it would require some form of guidelines and rules for the reviewing committee. We could suggest to people that they package it and have a friend or ask a colleague to make sure it works.
On your specific issue with mxCalendar, I know Charles and he's busy, however, his extras, as far as I know, are not abandoned but perhaps in need of attention. I've used a number of his extras and they've worked well. He's still in the MODX community and still works regularly with MODX.
We are definitely interested in making the Extras better and soon.
All the best,
Jay
Author of zero books. Formerly of many strange things. Pairs well with meats. Conversations are magical experiences. He's dangerous around code but a markup
magician.
Blog ✦
Twitter ✦
LinkedIn ✦
GitHub
-
- 98 Posts
Thanks, Jay.
A rating system is a good idea, but I have to admit, I am very reluctant to click "unlike" after all the hard work to get that particular Extra to that point. I don't really "unlike" it - that's not fair; it's closer to "I love it!" (if all of it worked.)
I see what you're saying about the difficulty in setting up any sort of guidelines and enforcing them, but rather than a partner being a "requirement", I am simply recommending it. For some Extras, a partner would be ridiculous - the programmer may have an idea, and hammer out the code much faster than they could even explain it to someone else. However, for an Extra with a number of bells and whistles, a partner could mean the difference between "almost" and "wonderful!"
Another consideration is the percentage of MODX users likely to need a specific Extra. For example, the Pet Clinic Template is a narrow niche, whereas the incorporation of CKEditor into a site is wide. So, Extra authors embarking on an Extra that is likely going to have broad use may also benefit from a partner (unless, again, the code for the Extra is whiz-bang simple for a coding wizard to whip out. Some things are brilliantly simple; some things are brilliant and complex.)
Dennis
-
- 534 Posts
same opinion here, I think a rating system could help prevent wasting time on not working exras, but as I mainly get extras trough the package manager, it would be nice if we could also rate and maybe even comment there (not just like/dislike, but stars maybe?). That information could then be used for the extras repository to create these warnings etc.