On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 4:12 PM, Esteban Lorenzano <esteba...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > >> On 11 Jun 2016, at 08:53, Alistair Grant <akgrant0...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hi Esteban, >> >> On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 02:52:46PM +0200, Esteban Lorenzano wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I was doing a pass on the catalog??? I think is very negative that >>> non-documented projects appear there??? because most people does not know >>> what does projects are about and newcomers will find weird a project >>> install tool with lots of projects without any description. >>> So I was thinking on put an option ???show all??? and hide those projects >>> by default??? but now I think those projects SHOULD NOT BE VISIBLE AT ALL, >>> as a way of: >>> >>> - offer better experience to non-power users, and >>> - encourage people to actually document their projects??? is very annoying >>> to have so much of them without any documentation. >>> >>> What do you think? >> >> Rather than hiding projects that people were legitimately allowed to add >> (at the time), why not modify the catalog to not accept projects >> that don't have sufficient metadata, including the description? > > it is not possible right now, and the hiding would work as the same. > > people were legitimately allowed is also relative… truth is that most > undocumented projects comes from MetacelloRepository (the original one) and > there was no catalog nor metacello toolbox :P > but most important: most of those projects are unmaintained projects are will > not load anyway, so they are not just source of noise, they also can make the > community looks bad, I think.
I agree its discouraging to see lots of blank descriptions when browsing the catalogue. Indeed it makes me wonder "is it working", which is bad. However I see something like Aconcagua which probably is very useful to have a catalog entry for, but maybe their it has no definite "owner" in our community. A solution besides completely hiding them would be to have an [Undocumented] tab. Then if the Catalog Browser had a help topic with a recipe on how to update the description of undocumented entries (download/modify/upload) perhaps(?) it would be easier for the community to contribute to updating them, than if they never appeared. I think our community image is maintained if the undocumented projects are segregated in this way. I think mainly brand/image suffers when deficiencies turn up in "official" looking locations. Not so much if its a designated badlands. It about user expectations and surprises. The default description might advise these were imported from a time before the catalog description field was defined, and refer to the help topic to request help updating the descriptions. cheers -ben > >> >> IIRC there was some discussion about hiding or lowering the priority of >> projects that haven't been modified or confirmed as working in the >> latest versions of Pharo. That would still be useful. > > well, hiding them would certainly “lower the category”. My first approach > (toggle hide/show) would work... > >> >> Between the two, that would get rid of undocumented projects. >> >> Just my 2c, >> Alistair > > cheers, > Esteban > >
