[pmwiki-users] RFC: Ratings Redux

[Crisses]

On Sep 27, 2006, at 7:31 AM, Joachim Durchholz wrote:

>> Third, I think an actual opinion helps.
>
> Textual opinions are already accounted for. Simply add a comment to  
> the
> recipe page.

1) I don't think the current cookbook encourages comments.
2) I find it most helpful if someone says 1* and explains WHY they  
gave the product/module only 1 star.

> If the rating indicators are just PmWiki markup, one can even add
> comments immediately below the rating. Or whatever works best.

I think a tiny form in the page footer is most encouraging.  Ease of  
use.  Rating: Comment:

I also think that a small descriptive link to the rating section in  
the footer ("Rate this Recipe") should be in the page header :)

People can still click to edit the page and edit whatever they want.

>> Popularity may be possible in other ways.
>
> Another way: count the total number of ratings given - that one  
> would be
> automatic and reasonably accurate.
>
> A third way: have something similar to Debian's popularity contest  
> tool.
> Installed recipes will report their activity to a central site.
> That would be a very automatic way to get at reasonably reliable
> deployment data, and help assess which recipes need most attention  
> e.g.
> when updating PmWiki.

I prefer last activity AND a rating of the stability of the product  
(pre-alpha, alpha, beta, stable/production use).  The main stable  
recipe should NOT be replaced with a beta, any new features added for  
testing should be in a temporary fork.  Recommendations for how  
stable each release is can be in the release notes.

> Potential liabilities that I see:
> * Configuration-only recipes won't show up on the radar.

"theory/concept, hack, config change, sanctioned/official use" :)

The rest of the Debian's popularity concept is over my head or too  
technical for a day without coffee -- and I don't drink coffee ;)  I  
think it's well beyond what we're looking for.

Crisses
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/pmwiki-users/attachments/20060927/d33e42d6/attachment.html