Hi ! Le 14 nov. 2009 à 14:28, Patrick Robertson a écrit :
> I really think we need to make some kind of new site with everything stuck > together, as QS is getting extremely fragmented. I also agree there's a need for some consolidation. Since the move to GitHub, I'm planning on closing the Issues on Google Code ASAP, directing people to try the latest and reopen them on GitHub if still applicable. Feel free to create pages on the Wiki for stuff you consider important, like the user guide (I'm afraid you'll have to create an account tough). > One of the main reasons I think for doing with would be so that we could > re-enable the QS update feature in the app, and enable the download of > plugins from the new site (where the plugins will be updated) > At the moment, if a user wants to update they have to go over to QS Google > Code and download the new app. More annoyingly if they see someones released > an updated plugin they have to go download that then stick it in the QS > application support folder. > I was thinking, if we could get the plugininfo.php file source that's over at > blacktree.com we could really easily re-implement this. The update feature is still working. Alcor used it to push ß56a7 to users before Snow Leopard. But he's the only one with access to it atm, and not really "active" anymore. What I was thinking was more along the line of dropping the old update mechanism and switching to Sparkle, so we could have a more "widespread" (as in "fewer bugs") update system, and then provide appcasts for both the application and plugins separately, and people providing plugins would use Sparkle for their updates. I'll try to tackle this in the next few weeks... > On top of this MAIN thing we'd also be able to do the things mentioned in the > post - new forum if we needed it. Link to the current github source, support, > documentation (Howard's guide, Applescripts) and more. I'm not against the current form of the forum, and we also have a (way quieter) developer mailing list, at http://groups.google.com/group/blacktree-alchemy-dev. I don't have any control on the support forum though, but if you guys are in need of help, count me in. I was also wondering about the information still available at blacktree.com, an maybe port the appropriate stuff up to the wiki on GitHub. Obviously that will require quite some work. I'll try to gather what's useful here and start creating a more friendly place over at GitHub (but I'm not against having a dedicated qsapp.com somewhere ;-)). Cheers, Etienne Le 15 nov. 2009 à 13:02, Patrick a écrit : > So it sounds like we'd want to go for a new site / front end, linking > to this group as the 'support forum'. > Then on the new site we'd sort out: > Documentation with list of applescripts etc. > Make a new update / plugins update system so users don't have to > download plugins or updates from all different places > Create a developer forum / mailing list > Link to the source code over at... Etienne's github I think > > I see what you mean Jon about stability. As much as I'd say "I'd be > happy to host the site indefinitely" I can see that something could go > wrong and mess up the site. I am up for hosting indefinitely though ;) > > To any WEB DEVELOPERS: > > Anybody fancy working on making a new QS site design? > > I could do it but time is a problem for me as well :( Although Xmas > hols would be a good place to start. > > On Nov 15, 3:19 am, "Jon Stovell (a.k.a. Sesquipedalian)" > <[email protected]> wrote: >> As a group manager, I like the Google Group for general discussion. It >> requires relatively little work for me (and I am not able to take on >> more, nor do I think Howard is), and has the very great benefit of >> stability. Moving to a volunteer-hosted website might offer us some >> whiz-bang extra features, but frankly I don't trust volunteer hosting. >> What happens when the hosting account expires? Who wants to pay for it >> in perpetuity? To me it sounds like asking for trouble, no matter how >> good the intentions of those volunteering to host a site for QS may >> be. The user support group should be as stable and accessible as >> possible, without any more sudden moves. >> >> As for the code and issues of fragmentation happening there, I am all >> in favour of doing something to centralize that, and of keeping >> discussion of code related matters on a code related forum. This group >> should really be for users supporting users. Along those lines, I >> would be entirely in favour of moving all the AppleScript related >> stuff on this group to a proper code-related site as well. The group >> is poorly designed for such a purpose, and it is a pain in the butt to >> keep up with all the scripts that get submitted. I'd far rather have a >> robust page somewhere that I can just point people to.
