Re: Call for designers for our ports website

[Joshua Root]

On 2020-6-13 12:18 , Arjun Salyan wrote:
> Hi Clemens,
> 
> On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 4:46 AM Clemens Lang  > wrote:
> 
> Please keep in mind that we do value URL stability. Specifically, I've
> recently added redirects so that our old ports.php script will now
> redirect the various links that are out there on upstream websites to
> ports.macports.org , preserving the
> search terms where possible:
>   https://github.com/macports/macports-www/pull/20
> 
>  
> Oh, wow. Thank you for this information.
>  
> 
> It would be appreciated if we could keep the existing URL structure for
> ports.macports.org  and not yet change it
> again, but it seems your
> changes have modified it.
> 
> 
> While setting the URLs initially I wasn't sure that we would be using
> the subdomain (ports.macports.org ), so I had
> appended every URL with an extra term (port or ports). For example, the
> category page is located at '/ports/category/ [1]. I saw this
> as an opportunity to drop that extra "ports/" from the URL and use just
> '/category/' [2] (I just realised that I was using plural
> categories till now). If this is not a good idea and is discouraged, we
> can switch back to the old URLs.

You can change the URL scheme if there are good reasons, but make sure
that old URLs are redirected to their new equivalent.

- Josh

Re: Call for designers for our ports website

[Arjun Salyan]

Hi Craig,

Thank you. You make a valid point regarding the possible distortion due to
weekly submissions being bundled to calculate monthly charts.

But what we are seeing here is a known issue with the query that calculates
this chart.
https://github.com/macports/macports-webapp/issues/79

The current query has a limitation. Let’s say we receive two submissions
from a user within one month. One has port version X.1 and the other has
upgraded version X.2, then this query counts that user as using both the
versions and not just the latest one. This is the cause for the sudden jump
in Mar 2020. This problem is only with the "versions vs month" chart and
should be fixed soon. Rest all charts, including "installations by month"
display accurate information (
https://ports.macports.org/port/gnuplot/stats?days=365).

Thank you for the percentage suggestion. I am just wondering the right way
to display that information graphically.

I was trying to combine "installations by months" and "versions by month",
but it turns out they would be better separate.

Thank you

Re: Call for designers for our ports website

[Arjun Salyan]

Hi Clemens,

On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 4:46 AM Clemens Lang  wrote:

> Please keep in mind that we do value URL stability. Specifically, I've
> recently added redirects so that our old ports.php script will now
> redirect the various links that are out there on upstream websites to
> ports.macports.org, preserving the search terms where possible:
>   https://github.com/macports/macports-www/pull/20


Oh, wow. Thank you for this information.


> It would be appreciated if we could keep the existing URL structure for
> ports.macports.org and not yet change it again, but it seems your
> changes have modified it.
>

While setting the URLs initially I wasn't sure that we would be using the
subdomain (ports.macports.org), so I had appended every URL with an extra
term (port or ports). For example, the category page is located at
'/ports/category/ [1]. I saw this as an opportunity to drop that
extra "ports/" from the URL and use just '/category/' [2] (I just
realised that I was using plural categories till now). If this is not a
good idea and is discouraged, we can switch back to the old URLs.

'/search' [3] is a new page with the addition of multiple new filters
(compared to just 2 now). This asks for a change to the [case 'library]
redirect. If we do not want that too, I can try to accommodate it.

Thank you

[1] https://ports.macports.org/ports/category/perl/
[2] http://macports.silentfox.tech/category/perl
[3] http://macports.silentfox.tech/search/

Re: Call for designers for our ports website

[Ken Cunningham]

> On Jun 12, 2020, at 6:03 PM, Saagar Jha  wrote:
> 
> I believe the lack of change there is almost certainly a matter of the 
> project’s personal stance rather than “nobody having a problem with it”.

"sufficient to make them change that policy"

> Personally, I would be fairly disappointed if MacPorts went opt-in 

I presume you meant to say opt-out



Off topic anyway, just went the new website model where I was struck by initial 
page highlighting the tiny number of total opt-in stats contributors, and what 
that means, if anything, regarding stats.

I think homebrew had 1,000,000 installs of — what was it — openssl or something.

Anyway, we won’t change that policy, and I don’t want a flame war about this. 
Just that our stats might not best be highlighted :>

K

Re: Call for designers for our ports website

[Saagar Jha]

I believe the lack of change there is almost certainly a matter of the 
project’s personal stance rather than “nobody having a problem with it”. In 
fact, after the change was merged in there was a fairly long discussion about 
first disclosing that there were analytics collected at all (which did 
eventually get implemented) and then switching off of Google Analytics or 
making it opt-in, which weren’t. Actually, there were multiple discussions but 
they like the original were generally closed as “WONTFIX” and this has been the 
policy to this day.

Personally, I would be fairly disappointed if MacPorts went opt-in as such 
policies suffer from statistical issues in addition to the obvious 
privacy-related ones.

Saagar Jha

> On Jun 12, 2020, at 16:48, Ken Cunningham  
> wrote:
> 
> Just FYI Homebrew has always been opt-out for stats. Nobody seems to have a 
> problem with that sufficient to make them change that policy.
> 
> We'll never know if that is why they seem to have 10 x the users on their 
> stats page.
> 
> K

Re: Call for designers for our ports website

[Ken Cunningham]

Just FYI Homebrew has always been opt-out for stats. Nobody seems to have a 
problem with that sufficient to make them change that policy.

We'll never know if that is why they seem to have 10 x the users on their stats 
page.

K

Re: Call for designers for our ports website

[Clemens Lang]

Hi Mojca, Arjun,

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 07:24:49PM +0200, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
> - http://macports.silentfox.tech/search/?installed_file==root=on

Please keep in mind that we do value URL stability. Specifically, I've
recently added redirects so that our old ports.php script will now
redirect the various links that are out there on upstream websites to
ports.macports.org, preserving the search terms where possible:
  https://github.com/macports/macports-www/pull/20

It would be appreciated if we could keep the existing URL structure for
ports.macports.org and not yet change it again, but it seems your
changes have modified it.

-- 
Clemens

Re: Announcement: System fonts port tree

[Nils Breunese]

Aaron Madlon-Kay  wrote:

> - Why make this?
> 
> I like to keep my fonts up to date, and MacPorts is a great way to do so.

I love this idea!

> I asked about including system font ports in the default ports tree a long 
> time ago on the dev list. The main problem is that it’s not “nice” to put the 
> install files outside of the blessed MacPorts directories ($prefix, 
> /Applications/MacPorts, etc.), so some sort of mechanism that symlinks to 
> /Library/Fonts would need to be developed.

Is the fact that it’s not “nice” to install files outside of the blessed 
directories reason enough to keep these ports out of the official ports tree? 
For fonts to work on macOS they need to be in a directory where macOS will look 
for them. I don’t really see the point of putting them in another directory and 
then creating symlinks outside the MacPorts tree.

I maintain the openjdk* ports and those install their files under 
/Library/Java/JavaVirtualMachines, because that’s where the macOS Java tools 
(like /usr/libexec/java_home) will look for Java Virtual Machines. These font 
ports sound like a pretty similar case to me.

Nils.

Fwd: Call for designers for our ports website

[Craig Treleaven]

Sorry, intended to send this to the dev list...

> Begin forwarded message:
> 
> From: Craig Treleaven 
> Subject: Re: Call for designers for our ports website
> Date: June 12, 2020 at 2:31:52 PM EDT
> To: Mojca Miklavec 
> 
>> On Jun 12, 2020, at 1:24 PM, Mojca Miklavec  wrote:
>> 
>> Dear MacPorters,
>> 
>> As part of a GSOC project Arjun has been working on great new features
>> for our web application with information about ports.
>> 
>> The application from last year has been deployed at
>>   https://ports.macports.org/
>> while the new testing site is temporarily located at
>>   http://macports.silentfox.tech/
>> 
>> The website already looks nice, but if we had some talented designers
>> among our users willing to help us go one step beyond what we have
>> right now, we would be extremely grateful for either just some advice
>> or potentially some more extensive help. There are a lot of minor
>> tweaks that could be done, but neither of us is a designer, and I'm
>> not able to give any competent advice about how to best improve the
>> layout.
>> 
>> Here are some concrete examples of subpages:
>> - http://macports.silentfox.tech/port/root6/
>> - http://macports.silentfox.tech/port/gnuplot/stats/?days=365_ago=0
>> - http://macports.silentfox.tech/search/?installed_file==root=on
>> 
>> Thank you very much in advance,
>>   Mojca
> 
> Not a designer, but…
> 
> Re "Port Installations by month" [1]
> 
> In the example referenced above, a new version of gnuplot was apparently made 
> available in March 2020.  At first glance, the chart used makes it look like 
> the number of installations of this port jumped up from about 82 in Feb. 2020 
> to 130 in March 2020; falling back in April 2020 to about 110.  This, 
> however, is a distortion introduced by our weekly submissions being 
> summarized into monthly buckets.  I believe we should be reporting the 
> _percentage_ of installations by version rather than the raw numbers.  Using 
> this example, about 94% of reporting systems were on version 5.2.7 in Feb. 
> 2020.  In March, 69% of submissions identified version 5.2.7 and 27% version 
> 5.2.8.  In April 2020, the submissions reporting version 5.2.7 was down to 
> 36% and 5.2.8 was up to 59%.  I believe this more clearly communicates the 
> degree to which reporters have updated to the most-recently released version.
> 
> If we want to show the number of installations by month irrespective of 
> version (and I think that is useful information), we should use the current 
> version of the chart “Installations by month” [2]
> 
> 
> [1] http://macports.silentfox.tech/port/gnuplot/stats/?days=365_ago=0
> [2] https://ports.macports.org/port/gnuplot/stats?days=365_ago=0
> 
> 
> Craig
> 

Call for designers for our ports website

[Mojca Miklavec]

Dear MacPorters,

As part of a GSOC project Arjun has been working on great new features
for our web application with information about ports.

The application from last year has been deployed at
https://ports.macports.org/
while the new testing site is temporarily located at
http://macports.silentfox.tech/

The website already looks nice, but if we had some talented designers
among our users willing to help us go one step beyond what we have
right now, we would be extremely grateful for either just some advice
or potentially some more extensive help. There are a lot of minor
tweaks that could be done, but neither of us is a designer, and I'm
not able to give any competent advice about how to best improve the
layout.

Here are some concrete examples of subpages:
- http://macports.silentfox.tech/port/root6/
- http://macports.silentfox.tech/port/gnuplot/stats/?days=365_ago=0
- http://macports.silentfox.tech/search/?installed_file==root=on

Thank you very much in advance,
Mojca