The current website is not fully operational, so I can only agree that it 
should be replaced.
But what will happen to the existing extensions? 
Will be migrated to the new one?

----- Mail original -----
> De: "Peter Kovacs" <[email protected]>
> À: "dev" <[email protected]>, "Andrea Pescetti" <[email protected]>
> Envoyé: Lundi 13 Octobre 2025 17:51:55
> Objet: (discussion) new extension Site (was: proposal for new extension page)
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Maybe the proposal was to technical. Lets try it a less technical
> approach.
> In a former Discussion we have (imho) concluded that we will need a
> extension web site, at least for the open source extensions.
> I hope this is still concent (please write a short agreement.)
> 
> if that is the case, I see the following requirements:
> - Extension Page
> -- intelligent search function
> -- browsing by tags / category
> -- fields:
> # Provider + contact
> # Application
> # license
> # Tags / Category
> # screenshots
> # source code link
> # last updated
> # compatibility
> # downloadlink
> ## support for own ASF source or external link (maybe only allowed to
> whitelisted addresses (SF, github, bitbucket, googlecode?)
> # Description
> # List of published versions
> # violation report
> 
> 
> - Extension maintainer page
> # Fields to set up
> ## dropdown for license field
> ## dynamic tags creation? (there is a document archivment server, i
> think it can autocreate tags)
> ## easy contact for support
> 
> - moderation page
> -- list of extension to moderate (new/ reported)
> -- approve / Reject / open button
> -- Discussion history to track desicions and  reasoning
> 
> - Roles (admin, moderator, extensionporvider)
> -- login (admin per asf sso, moderator & provider per passkey, 2fa?)
> 
> - webside in general
> -- try to be small and responsive (loadtime 1s if possible)
> -- cookie free (if posible)
> -- tracking free
> -- simple layout configuration (logo, design etc)
> -- mobile layout
> -- WCAG 2.1 Standards (mind. Level AA)
> -- Screen-Reader-compatibility
> -- dark mode
> -- touch device ready
> -- maybe warnings for unsopported devices for AOO
> 
> -crawlers
> -- Sitemap & robots.txt
> -- meta descriptores
> --
> 
> Whats your thoughts?
> 
> All the best
> Peter
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Am 02.10.2025 11:11 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > I discussed the case this morning with deep seek, what our options
> > are, what is the best tech stack going forward, if we would start
> > from
> > the scratch.
> > 
> > The requirement I gave the AI was that we host templates and
> > extensions, and we need a tech solution which is easy maintainable
> > for
> > 1 or 2 Medicare web developers and we need moderation capabilities.
> > 
> > The ai discourages the use of Drupal ( WordPress, typo3 are the
> > ones I
> > know and Drupal was the best choice so far, I check others if I
> > remember), because of it's steep learning curve and the reliance on
> > contributed modules. It admits we would get a fast start but it
> > predicts maintenance issues in the long run.
> > 
> > The clear recommendation was to build a frontend with Django, a
> > Postgress As Backend db, combined with a ceph or miniO as Object
> > storage.
> > Search engine elastic search or meilisearch
> > 
> > Deployment using docker. Which is the plan anyhow.
> > 
> > I ask what about an update of our Drupal instance and the ai
> > argument
> > again against it. It says there are a lot of changes between Drupal
> > 7
> > and 10. ( I did not mention any versions)
> > 
> > Your thoughts?
> > I can push the ai conversation if you want to read it and I can try
> > other LLMs too
> > 
> > All the best
> > Peter
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> 
> 

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to