[tw5] Re: Ideas for an UN-official community plugin library

[PMario]

Hi, 

I did start a (some) new threads. Start at:  Improve Community 
Communication with a - dot org 


have fun!
mario

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/04cf9539-7883-4e81-bf3a-0658782edbd2o%40googlegroups.com.

[tw5] Re: Ideas for an UN-official community plugin library

[Mat]

amreus wrote:
>
> I disagree.  Conflicts are 100% in the realm of library managers and must 
> be considered.
>

OK, maybe you're right after all.

<:-)

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/1e20c2cf-24b3-4271-b573-6d334ddac1f5o%40googlegroups.com.

[tw5] Re: Ideas for an UN-official community plugin library

[PMario]

On Sunday, August 16, 2020 at 11:10:14 PM UTC+2, amreus wrote:
>
> Is there a need for namespacing for plugins?  
>

Yes. Otherwise you will create conflicts. There is a reason, why plugins 
have a namespace. 

-mario

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/ba8e5025-aa37-4606-bf11-a5cb49b27689o%40googlegroups.com.

[tw5] Re: Ideas for an UN-official community plugin library

[amreus]

I disagree.  Conflicts are 100% in the realm of library managers and must 
be considered.

On Sunday, August 16, 2020 at 5:15:04 PM UTC-4 Mat wrote:

> @amreus - while the conversation has admittedly gone off on a tangent, 
> your question is definitely off topic. Pleaes start a new thread instead.
>
> <:-)
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/b6bd7419-850b-4295-9577-3d4971b4d18bn%40googlegroups.com.

[tw5] Re: Ideas for an UN-official community plugin library

[Mat]

@amreus - while the conversation has admittedly gone off on a tangent, your 
question is definitely off topic. Pleaes start a new thread instead.

<:-)

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/581aa6e4-8712-4d41-bb71-72c3988dcbfbo%40googlegroups.com.

[tw5] Re: Ideas for an UN-official community plugin library

[amreus]

Is there a need for namespacing for plugins?  

For example, if 2 plugins both define a css class with the same name, which 
gets used?  Or if 2 plugins define a macro with the same name, what 
happens?  Does the last loaded macro take precedence?

If this is an issue it would it need to be addressed sooner rather than 
later?


On Sunday, August 16, 2020 at 1:54:18 PM UTC-4 PMario wrote:

> On Sunday, August 16, 2020 at 6:00:47 PM UTC+2, Mark S. wrote:
>>
>> I might point out that Linux operates this way.
>>
>> When you install Linux, almost any variety, you also get a package 
>> manager. With the package manager you have access to 1000s of different 
>> software products. You just search, select, and install the software that 
>> you want without having to search the web, download, find dependencies, 
>> etc. The versions you get may not be the latest versions, but that's 
>> usually OK. If people need the latest, then they go to the original source.
>>
>
> I think we can't compare "apt" or other installation managers with a 
> public overview of TW plugins. We don't have any security measures built 
> in. None of our packages can be validated. ... So everyone can clone and 
> modify a plugin and republish a potentially evel version with the same 
> name. .. At the moment our users don't have a possibility to validate 
> anything. 
>
> That's an other element, which I think about for quite some time. ... At 
> the moment our system is "kind of" OK, because we can trust the community 
> members, that create plugins. ... But if TW grows considerably, we will 
> need to think about some more security too. 
>
> With the proposed system, it would be possible to implement a "community 
> review" system. Similar to video 8. 
>
> A second measure could be, that we publish a plugin hash overview on the 
> community page. So everyone can check if an installed plugin has the same 
> hash as the one installed in a wiki. The hash validation could be done with 
> a browser plugin. ... But that's probably a completely different thread, 
> which would need contribution from security experts. 
>
> just some thoughts
> -mario
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/589ece88-13e5-46b6-b009-0685dcc10199n%40googlegroups.com.

[tw5] Re: Ideas for an UN-official community plugin library

[PMario]

On Sunday, August 16, 2020 at 6:00:47 PM UTC+2, Mark S. wrote:
>
> I might point out that Linux operates this way.
>
> When you install Linux, almost any variety, you also get a package 
> manager. With the package manager you have access to 1000s of different 
> software products. You just search, select, and install the software that 
> you want without having to search the web, download, find dependencies, 
> etc. The versions you get may not be the latest versions, but that's 
> usually OK. If people need the latest, then they go to the original source.
>

I think we can't compare "apt" or other installation managers with a public 
overview of TW plugins. We don't have any security measures built in. None 
of our packages can be validated. ... So everyone can clone and modify a 
plugin and republish a potentially evel version with the same name. .. At 
the moment our users don't have a possibility to validate anything. 

That's an other element, which I think about for quite some time. ... At 
the moment our system is "kind of" OK, because we can trust the community 
members, that create plugins. ... But if TW grows considerably, we will 
need to think about some more security too. 

With the proposed system, it would be possible to implement a "community 
review" system. Similar to video 8. 

A second measure could be, that we publish a plugin hash overview on the 
community page. So everyone can check if an installed plugin has the same 
hash as the one installed in a wiki. The hash validation could be done with 
a browser plugin. ... But that's probably a completely different thread, 
which would need contribution from security experts. 

just some thoughts
-mario

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/8ef2392c-55dc-4c4a-be0d-0b347270db14o%40googlegroups.com.

[tw5] Re: Ideas for an UN-official community plugin library

['Mark S.' via TiddlyWiki]

I might point out that Linux operates this way.

When you install Linux, almost any variety, you also get a package manager. 
With the package manager you have access to 1000s of different software 
products. You just search, select, and install the software that you want 
without having to search the web, download, find dependencies, etc. The 
versions you get may not be the latest versions, but that's usually OK. If 
people need the latest, then they go to the original source.



On Sunday, August 16, 2020 at 8:20:08 AM UTC-7, PMario wrote:
>
> On Sunday, August 16, 2020 at 3:53:08 PM UTC+2, Mark S. wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Hi, ... Not really. 
>>>
>>>
>> We would ask first, of course.
>>
>> So your plugins aren't open source?
>>
>
> Sure they are. ... But being in control and defining an organisational 
> hierarchy in Git*H*ub is a PITA. As far as I can see, the access rights 
> can only be defined per repo and not per "subdirectory". .. And there is no 
> convenient and easy to explore "sub-repo" structure. 
>
> I did play around with a tiddlywiki-org organisation 
>  at github 3 month ago.  ... As you 
> can see "plugins" is 1 element of it. ... It also contains some basic 
> configuration for 15 teams, that will allow users to create a basic 
> "access" structure. .. But the system at GitHub was designed for Enterprise 
> organisations, where you have 10 admins that have a full time job, doing 
> the maintenance (Just my experience, but I may be missing the simple 
> stuff.). 
>
> I did want to mimic something which I had experimented with at Git*L*ab 2 
> years ago: https://GitLab.com/tiddlywiki.org ... where it is easy and 
> convenient to configure. There is even a youtube playlist 
> ,
>  
> that describes most of the ideas in much more detail. ...  
>
> Down to a prototype of *1 possible* Governance Model 
> , that starts as 
> simple as possible and is just a starting point. 
>
> From my point of view, before we put a lot of energy into an "un"official 
> plugin library, We should put it into an "*Official Community Dot Org*" 
> project. (I actually don't know, who owns tiddlywiki.org ... but it also 
> could be tiddly.wiki which imo belongs to TT)
>
> BUT from my point of view, we need a Governance Model first, that defines 
> the basic "rule set" for contributions to the different elements. We need 
> to describe the "decision making" process, so users know about them, so 
> they can be sure what to expect. see: Governance Model 
> 
>
> 
>
> List of videos 
> ,
>  
> so you know, what I was thinking about: 
>
> 01 Improve Community Communication - Intro
> 02 TiddlyWiki Landingpage - proposal
> 03 Feature Request and Voting Mechanism
> 04 Using e-mail to request a new feature
> 05 Governance Model Proposal
> 06 Use Issues, to contribute to governance model
> 07 Use merge request, to contribute to governance
> 08 Consensus Seeking and Repo Structure
> 09 Request Access to Sub-Groups
>
> Have fun!
> mario
>
> PS: I didn't promote the Git*L*ab idea, since I didn't see a convenient 
> way to migrate contributors from GitHub to GitLab. 
>
> PPS: tiddlywiki.org.gitlab.io isn't possible anymore. ... But the second 
> video shows, how it was meant ;)
>
> PPPS: I personally think, that GitHub is not mature enough to make the 
> management easy, but if *someone can tell me the simple stuff *it may be 
> a possibility too. 
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/1cfd47dc-3411-43c2-b64c-1129e1e2f682o%40googlegroups.com.

[tw5] Re: Ideas for an UN-official community plugin library

[PMario]

On Sunday, August 16, 2020 at 3:53:08 PM UTC+2, Mark S. wrote:
>
>
>
>
>> Hi, ... Not really. 
>>
>>
> We would ask first, of course.
>
> So your plugins aren't open source?
>

Sure they are. ... But being in control and defining an organisational 
hierarchy in Git*H*ub is a PITA. As far as I can see, the access rights can 
only be defined per repo and not per "subdirectory". .. And there is no 
convenient and easy to explore "sub-repo" structure. 

I did play around with a tiddlywiki-org organisation 
 at github 3 month ago.  ... As you can 
see "plugins" is 1 element of it. ... It also contains some basic 
configuration for 15 teams, that will allow users to create a basic 
"access" structure. .. But the system at GitHub was designed for Enterprise 
organisations, where you have 10 admins that have a full time job, doing 
the maintenance (Just my experience, but I may be missing the simple 
stuff.). 

I did want to mimic something which I had experimented with at Git*L*ab 2 
years ago: https://GitLab.com/tiddlywiki.org ... where it is easy and 
convenient to configure. There is even a youtube playlist 
,
 
that describes most of the ideas in much more detail. ...  

Down to a prototype of *1 possible* Governance Model 
, that starts as 
simple as possible and is just a starting point. 

>From my point of view, before we put a lot of energy into an "un"official 
plugin library, We should put it into an "*Official Community Dot Org*" 
project. (I actually don't know, who owns tiddlywiki.org ... but it also 
could be tiddly.wiki which imo belongs to TT)

BUT from my point of view, we need a Governance Model first, that defines 
the basic "rule set" for contributions to the different elements. We need 
to describe the "decision making" process, so users know about them, so 
they can be sure what to expect. see: Governance Model 




List of videos 
,
 
so you know, what I was thinking about: 

01 Improve Community Communication - Intro
02 TiddlyWiki Landingpage - proposal
03 Feature Request and Voting Mechanism
04 Using e-mail to request a new feature
05 Governance Model Proposal
06 Use Issues, to contribute to governance model
07 Use merge request, to contribute to governance
08 Consensus Seeking and Repo Structure
09 Request Access to Sub-Groups

Have fun!
mario

PS: I didn't promote the Git*L*ab idea, since I didn't see a convenient way 
to migrate contributors from GitHub to GitLab. 

PPS: tiddlywiki.org.gitlab.io isn't possible anymore. ... But the second 
video shows, how it was meant ;)

PPPS: I personally think, that GitHub is not mature enough to make the 
management easy, but if *someone can tell me the simple stuff *it may be a 
possibility too. 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/e08a9754-8d57-4d13-af00-0167edfe0bd4o%40googlegroups.com.

[tw5] Re: Ideas for an UN-official community plugin library

[Ste]

Off topic but I keep reading this as U.N.Official community plugin library and 
get half way though thinking 'wow.. Tiddlywiki being used by the UN and they 
have a plugin library for it!!! That's amazing' before reading the title 
correctly. 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/a924c643-cd8b-4944-b59f-30a09e19c35ao%40googlegroups.com.

[tw5] Re: Ideas for an UN-official community plugin library

['Mark S.' via TiddlyWiki]

> Hi, ... Not really. 
>
>
We would ask first, of course.

So your plugins aren't open source?
 

>
> I don't want them to be "language" mixed _and_ may be "author" mixed. 
>
>
I was talking about a LIBRARY. The plugins are not activated and can't 
conflict until someone loads them into their own TW file. If they choose to 
load 20 at once, that's their risk.

To be clear. I want to be in control of my content! I don't want the 
> library config tiddlers to be cloned! I only want a link to the pages, that 
> contain the config tiddlers! It needs to be possible to have 1 and only 1 
> "source of truth"!
>
>
The problem with 1 source of truth is, as history has shown, is that it is 
*ONE* step away from *zero*. 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/1b677b59-9814-4414-9ca4-d6958075bed7o%40googlegroups.com.

[tw5] Re: Ideas for an UN-official community plugin library

[PMario]

On Sunday, August 16, 2020 at 8:58:01 AM UTC+2, Mat wrote:
>
> Mark S. wrote:
>>
>> [...] why not have a plugin library repository on github? 
>>
>  
> [...] And would plugin makers even *want *to host their plugins there, in 
> someone elses repository? (Would you?)
>

Hi, ... Not really. 

I do have 19 plugins and 1 theme in my library link at wikilabs 
organisation. ... I do take care, that my plugins are compatible with my 
theme and other prominent plugins eg: relink. BUT I'm not able to maintain 
compatibility with every other plugin library. 

A new organisation "Unite" is coming soon, which will start with 2 plugins. 
There should be more in the future "in German" as the primary language. 

I don't want them to be "language" mixed _and_ may be "author" mixed. 

---

BUT having a curated repository, with a "landing page" that links to 
different organisations would be OK. ... 

To be clear. I want to be in control of my content! I don't want the 
library config tiddlers to be cloned! I only want a link to the pages, that 
contain the config tiddlers! It needs to be possible to have 1 and only 1 
"source of truth"!

just my thoughts. 
mario

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/fc6f5a48-be19-4283-b7f8-3aef9993cee7o%40googlegroups.com.

[tw5] Re: Ideas for an UN-official community plugin library

[Mat]

BTW, another route for an unofficial library is @Jed (!) He has generously 
offered his server as one node in what can be a real federated system, 
based on TW technology. Most parts are actually already in place but it is 
more complex than the ideas I outlined in the OP here so it would demand 
some focus to put the pieces together. This would be the *real *solution. 
People would install a plugin library and it would access his server (and 
any other) which has either plugins directly hosted or has a list that is 
updated by roaming reported sites. 

People would still need to find out about the plugin library but if it is 
the one solution, then I think there will be enough talk about it. Compare 
it to the talk about e.g his Bob solutions - these are very present because 
people ask how to solve the problem it targets and people refer to them. 
There's constant talk about plugins to there'd be constant mention of an 
unofficial plugin library if there were one.

<:-)

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/abb670fd-6ac9-48e0-ae5b-cacd1858b127o%40googlegroups.com.

[tw5] Re: Ideas for an UN-official community plugin library

[Mat]

Mark S. wrote:
>
> [...] why not have a plugin library repository on github? 
>
 
Perfect ...if it didn't demand special knowledge to work with it. And, as 
you note, anyone who wants to add things needs to become a "member" to the 
repository. And would plugin makers even *want *to host their plugins 
there, in someone elses repository? (Would you?)


Otherwise, all you have is a listing of plugins, similar to the tiddlymap 
> project. 
>

IMO it makes a big difference to have access to the list from within your 
wiki, even if the list contains external links.

 

> Re Tiddlymap, Dave does accept volunteers to help maintain the project.
>

IMO the problem with such individual project is that they are just that, 
individual projects, even if there were volunteers willing to help. (Has 
anyone volunteered?) And it still means one has to be a "member" to add to 
it.

The problem with Tiddlymap, or an Unofficial library, is that if something 
> is not prominently listed on TiddlyWiki.com, 
>

Yeah, huge problem. Without official and prominent endorsement it is very 
tough to persistently communicate anything to the community. It is/was the 
same problem for Erwans Community Search 
 which even aggregates new 
plugins and updates semi-automatically! If nobody hears about it, things 
die.

But this is also why my suggestion has a practice to announce the updates 
in one perennial thread. It only takes one message in a thread for it to be 
brought to attention again.
 

> I can't help but notice that the tiddlymap is not mentioned even on the 
> top of this forum, even though reddit and twitter, arguably much less 
> useful, are mentioned.
>

Good point! @moderators - ?

<:-)

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/e799d11c-d881-4b80-8fba-410e9b9996a3o%40googlegroups.com.

[tw5] Re: Ideas for an UN-official community plugin library

['Mark S.' via TiddlyWiki]

If you're specifically targeting plugins, then why not have a plugin 
library repository on github? Github allows you to add collaborators (not 
sure how many). Then people could add a single tiddler to their TW file, 
and instantly have access to all the plugins that have been made available. 
This would make it easy to see if Plugin A was right for you, or if Plugin 
X conflicts with Plugin Z without having to go to a half-dozen websites 
(which sometimes disappear!).

If the originator of the library disappears, someone else can clone the 
library and start over. The great thing about a library is that the code is 
right there -- no orphaned links.

Otherwise, all you have is a listing of plugins, similar to the tiddlymap 
project. Re Tiddlymap, Dave does accept volunteers to help maintain the 
project.

The problem with Tiddlymap, or an Unofficial library, is that if something 
is not prominently listed on TiddlyWiki.com, people won't find it except by 
accident. That detracts from the energy and enthusiasm that would otherwise 
be generated. I can't help but notice that the tiddlymap is not mentioned 
even on the top of this forum, even though reddit and twitter, arguably 
much less useful, are mentioned.

On Saturday, August 15, 2020 at 1:44:51 AM UTC-7, Mat wrote:
>
> Here is are two ideas for a "plugin library" for unofficial things. The 
> first we could start using more or less *today.* The second would need a 
> little experimenting but is probably even better. Anyone skilled could 
> probably also solve it in a mere few hours.
>
> *First idea*
> We have a shared tiddler containing a list of all plugin URLs and whatever 
> meta data is appropriate. This tiddler is simply circulated on the boards. 
> I.e we have a designated forum thread and anyone adding something to the 
> tiddler posts and update in the thread with the tiddler attached. The 
> tiddler should contain a kind of version ledger (see below) so that you can 
> see which previous version it is based on. Yes, there can be conflicts if 
> two people update the list at the same time BUT I doubt this would be a big 
> deal if it is simple enough to add something again; It is just a single 
> tiddler and *the forum posts are sequential *so conflicts would be pretty 
> obvious and we always have the record for all events. Versioning could be 
> done like so:
>
> ... -- 53 by Mark -- 54 by Mario -- 55 by Mat
>
> so if there is another copy stating
>
> ... -- 53 by Mark -- 54 by Mario -- 55 by Tony
>
> then Tony and I will slug it out. Or whoever posted their update last will 
> simply need to adjust and repost.
>
> One could compliment this with a UI type plugin for *presenting *the 
> list, including a UI for adding or modifying data to the list, but that is 
> another matter - the list is the meat of it.
>
>
> *Second idea*
> Fellow Siniy-kit recently detailed how to pull data from a Google Sheet 
> into TW 
> . As 
> you know, Google sheets can be made publicly editable. So we could have one 
> such central sheet. The un-official plugin library would be a plugin that 
> pulls from this, i.e converts it into a tiddler. I assume this would even 
> allow filtering when fetching so there could be a TW plugin where you state 
> what type of plugin you're interested in (or their rating, or what author, 
> or... )
>
> This would even allow a custom input form so people can easily add new 
> items to the list by using Google Forms. (Forms is integrated with Sheets 
> for this purpose.) I.e it would be a form asking the contributor to fill 
> in: "Pluging name", "select category", "review" etc. Would have to think 
> through how multiple entries of same plugin would work tho. Maybe not a 
> problem since they are added as rows in the sheet and I can easily think of 
> some ways it could be handled when importing into TW.
>
> ...
>
> Personally, I find the Google Sheets idea particularly appealing (but 
> that's also because it'd overall be very interesting to use Google Sheets 
> as a TW backend). In contrast to the curated lists we currently have from a 
> few good hearted community members, this system would not rely on *single 
> *individuals. This is *absolutely critical*, as evidenced from curation 
> endevours in the past. For one, curating such a list is a huge task that is 
> typically not sufficiently handled by a single individual and, most 
> importantly: If the owner of the list should stop hosting it, for whatever 
> reason, this proposal would make it *super *simple for anyone else to 
> make a copy and continue. And the first proposal is really nobody hosting 
> it at all other than the google forum.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Anyone brave enough to start?
>
>
> <:-)
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@

[tw5] Re: Ideas for an UN-official community plugin library

[Mat]

@TT

I'm talking about the "jar" not about what it is filled with. To *where* 
the provided links in the "library list" lead is a totally different 
matter. It can be to plugins or whole applications - what would you provide 
links to? :-)

<:-)

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/e3134fbd-c411-4b61-88b8-8331b79375dbo%40googlegroups.com.

[tw5] Re: Ideas for an UN-official community plugin library

[TiddlyTweeter]

What is it for?

Well, I know we have an information problem of serious scale. Finding stuff 
you need is an intimidating undertaking.

TW can do so much. But (1) understanding exactly how needs are addressed by 
(2) tools that (3) are usually difficult to locate is (4) a BLOCK on uptake.

This is not easy for a TW-Naut already. It is much more difficult for a 
beginner.

To my Question: *ARE users more interested in yet more "bits" of things. 
OR, maybe whole APPLICATIONS???*

 *I like very much your two practical strategies*. They are incremental. 
Build off what we have already.

IMO its more likely to work & be adopted IF it explicitly targets *usage 
needs,* providing sets of stuff by user needs (e.g. "Available Parts For 
Mathematicians").

My 2 cents
TT


On Saturday, 15 August 2020 10:44:51 UTC+2, Mat wrote:
>
> Here is are two ideas for a "plugin library" for unofficial things. The 
> first we could start using more or less *today.* The second would need a 
> little experimenting but is probably even better. Anyone skilled could 
> probably also solve it in a mere few hours.
>
> *First idea*
> We have a shared tiddler containing a list of all plugin URLs and whatever 
> meta data is appropriate. This tiddler is simply circulated on the boards. 
> I.e we have a designated forum thread and anyone adding something to the 
> tiddler posts and update in the thread with the tiddler attached. The 
> tiddler should contain a kind of version ledger (see below) so that you can 
> see which previous version it is based on. Yes, there can be conflicts if 
> two people update the list at the same time BUT I doubt this would be a big 
> deal if it is simple enough to add something again; It is just a single 
> tiddler and *the forum posts are sequential *so conflicts would be pretty 
> obvious and we always have the record for all events. Versioning could be 
> done like so:
>
> ... -- 53 by Mark -- 54 by Mario -- 55 by Mat
>
> so if there is another copy stating
>
> ... -- 53 by Mark -- 54 by Mario -- 55 by Tony
>
> then Tony and I will slug it out. Or whoever posted their update last will 
> simply need to adjust and repost.
>
> One could compliment this with a UI type plugin for *presenting *the 
> list, including a UI for adding or modifying data to the list, but that is 
> another matter - the list is the meat of it.
>
>
> *Second idea*
> Fellow Siniy-kit recently detailed how to pull data from a Google Sheet 
> into TW 
> . As 
> you know, Google sheets can be made publicly editable. So we could have one 
> such central sheet. The un-official plugin library would be a plugin that 
> pulls from this, i.e converts it into a tiddler. I assume this would even 
> allow filtering when fetching so there could be a TW plugin where you state 
> what type of plugin you're interested in (or their rating, or what author, 
> or... )
>
> This would even allow a custom input form so people can easily add new 
> items to the list by using Google Forms. (Forms is integrated with Sheets 
> for this purpose.) I.e it would be a form asking the contributor to fill 
> in: "Pluging name", "select category", "review" etc. Would have to think 
> through how multiple entries of same plugin would work tho. Maybe not a 
> problem since they are added as rows in the sheet and I can easily think of 
> some ways it could be handled when importing into TW.
>
> ...
>
> Personally, I find the Google Sheets idea particularly appealing (but 
> that's also because it'd overall be very interesting to use Google Sheets 
> as a TW backend). In contrast to the curated lists we currently have from a 
> few good hearted community members, this system would not rely on *single 
> *individuals. This is *absolutely critical*, as evidenced from curation 
> endevours in the past. For one, curating such a list is a huge task that is 
> typically not sufficiently handled by a single individual and, most 
> importantly: If the owner of the list should stop hosting it, for whatever 
> reason, this proposal would make it *super *simple for anyone else to 
> make a copy and continue. And the first proposal is really nobody hosting 
> it at all other than the google forum.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Anyone brave enough to start?
>
>
> <:-)
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/c2b81b9d-c530-458b-8250-a984f4aca5e7o%40googlegroups.com.