Ok, in 12374 (incomplete, needs love) https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/12374/Display-package-description-on-selection-in-the-Configuration-Browser
Cheers, Hernán 2013/12/9 Stéphane Ducasse <[email protected]> > > > Hi Hernan, > > the problem is not the button - but the missing standard and standardized > descriptions > on the configs... > > For instance I also write markup docu on my configs (see > ConfigurationOfINIFile) - it > is loadable as a usual config but adds two class side methods: > #documentation > and #tutorialOn: using the <onlineTutorial> pragma. > > The documentation is stored as class comment in markdown format on the > ConfigurationOfINIFile class. I use the same description then for the > STHub project page. > > If one loads additionally the "PharoOnlineHelp" package afterwards it will > also appear > magically in my Pharo online help as a tutorial. This was my proposal - > but so far it looks > like nobody is really interested. > > > this is not that this is a question of time. > And sorry but I will not use markdown. > > Maybe because often this ends in "which syntax" discussions and due to > the lack of > good in image default text display facilities for markup, pier-syntax, ... > > In general it can be done easily, but we have to agree on some kind of > "common > standard" > for configurations and documentation on > - how to describe a package (also the format, either markdown or pier > syntax with > http://smalltalkhub.com/#!/~Pier/Pillar<https://3c.gmx.net/mail/client/dereferrer?redirectUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fsmalltalkhub.com%2F%23%21%2F%7EPier%2FPillar> > ) > - how to name the methods or pragmas that are used > > > Stef also did something (with Catalog), the ConfigurationOfINIFile for > instance has two supporting > methods: #catalogDescription and > > > > #repositoryUrlString. > > this one is deprecated after discussing with versioner. > > Still Catalog uses Pier and is not really visible - and STHub does support > markdown by default. > > As of today I would like to see Pharo moving into the following direction: > - using the configs for describing the help/documentation/package > descriptions > - also tagging with package categories (for instance there are > packages/projects for "database access", others for "parsers", or "games") > - maybe use pier syntax for descriptions (it can be parsed by Pillar and > other formats like HTML, markdown, Latex, ... be generated) > - generate pages like catalog > https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-contribution/job/PharoProjectCatalog/HTML_Report/? > but with a better design and visibility like " > http://packages.pharo.org"; > > > The code is open. My time is really counted. > Just merged your convention to mine and unify. > > together with a loadable list for the config browser > - when one uploads such a ConfigurationOfMyKillerApp to STHub it should > automagically update the > STHub description (which is currently only possible via the web > interface) > - additional rankings (number of downloads like on STHub, successful CI > builds, member rankings, ...) > - automated verfication > - ... <snip>lot of other ideas</snip> > > Bye > T. > > *Gesendet:* Sonntag, 08. Dezember 2013 um 22:12 Uhr > *Von:* "Hernán Morales Durand" <[email protected]> > *An:* "Pharo Development List" <[email protected]> > *Betreff:* Re: [Pharo-dev] It would be too expensive to add a description > for packages in Configuration Browser? > Hi Torsten, > > 2013/12/8 Torsten Bergmann <[email protected]> >> >> The reason is simple: when I wrote the config browser >> there was no such additional description on the configs itself >> and one would have to load the config into the image first. >> >> Think of 2000 config's (note each is a package) loading in the future when >> the config browser opens. This will take ages. I think this is not good >> since the app should be responsive. >> >> Maybe a "show details" button helps when the package is selected. >> > > > > I agree (see attached screenshot). I have added the button but the thing > is: Package can be fetched from the repository, but there is no package > description. There are only textual descriptions of commits. > > So anyone see any workaround here? > > > >> >> I would rather see: >> 1. Either a simple hosted seaside app "Pharo Store" that one can use to >> register a config for a specific pharo version (similar like >> squeakmap) >> maybe directly from the STHub interface with description, ... >> >> This app can be queried by the config browser (JSON/XML/Fuel/...) >> to display infos on the package, maybe also a rating about downloads, >> ... >> >> 2. Or a general mechanism that loads the configs, runs tests and if >> OK provides them for the config browser as "yes these config really >> work" >> > > > Absolutely. Configurations should be certified. > > > Hernán > > > >
