[pmwiki-users] Recommended recipes?

[Eemeli Aro]

2009/8/27 Petko Yotov <5ko at 5ko.fr>:
> On Thursday 27 August 2009 13:15:12 Twylite wrote:
>> Many recipes have some indication of stability and maintainer, but also
>> no way to tell if this information is up-to-date.
>
> I am not sure how to best address this. It the information is old, you could
> maybe contact the developer by e-mail and ask.

I'd recommend looking at the comments section or talk page for the
recipe, and see how actively the recipe maintainer has replied to
comments and bug reports.

> The "Status" line is a personal appreciation by the author of the recipe.
> There could be recipes marked Beta or even Experimental which work fine and
> have no known bugs, but the author may feel they have not been extensively
> tested, or that not all planned features have been added. OTOH an author with
> little programming experience could believe his recipe is stable, but he may
> not have noticed some issues.

Regarding recipe status, perhaps we need some kind of recommended set
of terms to use, along with a page giving a slightly longer
description of each term, as I for example have ended up with a
perpetual beta for all my recipes since "stable" seems like a rather
strong term to use.

> [**] There is a discussion about a "community recommended" bundle of recipes
> that are actually used, work well together, and will hopefully be fixed by the
> community if problems appear. At some places around the globe it is still the
> Summer vacation, so there hasn't been much action, but the page is here:
>
>  http://www.pmwiki.org/wiki/Cookbook/Bundle

Sometimes it seems like my brain is on permanent vacation... In any
case, to fix Bundle, input is required! Please go to the above page
and add comments on recipes that you think should (or should not) be
part of a default bundle of recipes.

2009/8/27 Peter Bowers <pbowers at pobox.com>:
> On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 11:06 AM, Petko Yotov<5ko at 5ko.fr> wrote:
>> We have discussed such votes/endorsements systems, I hope we'll be able to add
>> one soon. I also hope that users will vote.
>
> +100 on adding one soon!
>
> [He said, without much hope and completely in the dark as to why
> previous seemingly fruitful discussions on the topic[1] have fallen
> flat.]

Seconding Peter on this. Is it Petko or PM we should be prodding to
get this moving?

eemeli