New QS Website

[Patrick]

I posted about a possible new forum a while back because Google Groups
was driving my up the wall (still is)

But seeing the fact that QS development seems to be branching away the
from Google Code source, and other people are writing new plugins etc.
I think maybe having a new QS 'website' would be a good idea.

We could:

Make a new QS site with support & documentation
Open some support forums (I've yet to see a way of exporting data from
Google Groups though)
** More importantly: pull all the changes that are being made by
everyone together
** This could involve changing the plugin URL from the current
blacktree.com URL where nothing is maintained (plugin-wise) and to a
'new URL' where new /updated plugins would be added for users to
download.

Now I'd be happy to the hosting and managing side of things - it
shouldn't be too difficult, but I'd say we'd need collaboration from
everyone.

Thoughts?

Patrick

[elspub]

I completely agree. This google group has become too much of a blended
panacea for the QS community: support, tips, help, development, bug/
issue reporting, applescript, etc.

As it looks like actual development of QS is moving to github (or am i
wrong about that?) I could see issue/bug reporting and discussion
moving there.

Which leaves a need for a site which
1. offers up-to-date recommended download links (with different
links for different OS X versions)
2. has basic tips and advice for beginner (an FAQ)
3. a discussion forum with different sections for things like
applescripting, advanced use, community provided support for users.

Right now its all just a mess, with the most active discussion about
development happening in the depths of a single post:
and often repeated questions and issues.

I don't know much about web hosting, but I'd be happy to contribute.

[Rob McBroom]

On Nov 13, 2009, at 1:13 PM, Patrick wrote:

> I posted about a possible new forum a while back because Google Groups
> was driving my up the wall (still is)
>
> But seeing the fact that QS development seems to be branching away the
> from Google Code source, and other people are writing new plugins etc.
> I think maybe having a new QS 'website' would be a good idea.

I feel like code, issue tracking, plugins, etc. needs to be rethought since it's getting splintered, but I have no problems with the current discussion forum here. I'm not married to it either and wouldn't oppose a move, but I have one request: Make sure we can still follow along and post via e-mail as you can with Google Groups.

Are you “using” this group via the web or via e-mail? Because I'm sure it would drive me crazy too if I had to use the web interface. :)

--
Rob McBroom
<http://www.skurfer.com/>

[Howard Melman]

On Nov 13, 2009, at 3:40 PM, Rob McBroom wrote:

> I feel like code, issue tracking, plugins, etc. needs to be rethought since it's getting splintered, but I have no problems with the current discussion forum here. I'm not married to it either and wouldn't oppose a move, but I have one request: Make sure we can still follow along and post via e-mail as you can with Google Groups.
>
> Are you “using” this group via the web or via e-mail? Because I'm sure it would drive me crazy too if I had to use the web interface. :)

I agree 100%.

Howard

[Patrick]

I am using the web interface, didn't know you could use if via
email... I'll look into it.

So a new site with a collection of everything would be a good idea?

I'll see what Etienne and the other current developers think of the
idea

[David Leidig]

I really think this is essential. I stopped seriously paying attention
to discussion/etc for about a six months, and I came back to find a
confusing array of sites including the two (apparently new?) github
sites. This project really needs a solid foundation site to distribute
the newest information (and download locations) to everyone.

[Jon Stovell (a.k.a. Sesquipedalian)]

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.

[Patrick]

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 ;)

And I still think google groups sucks badly :( You can't even edit the
bloody posts!

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)"

[Etienne Samson]

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)"
<jonstov...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Patrick]

qsapp.com?

I was thinking of buying either that or qsmac.com

What would everyone prefer as a domain :)

On Nov 15, 5:16 pm, Etienne Samson <tienn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 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, athttp://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.

[Jon Stovell (a.k.a. Sesquipedalian)]

Of course, instead of creating an entirely new site, we could ask
Alcor if some trusted members can have access to blacktree.com itself,
or at least the Quicksilver section of it. Integrating the GitHub
content, such as the wiki, etc., could then be done relatively easily
(even if only by plopping in some iframes, so that the GitHub content
itself can run independently.) After all, blacktree.com has been QS's
home since its inception. It'd be best to stay there as much as
possible.

[Patrick]

Good idea, I like it.
'Permanent', reliable hosting, structure to build from, a site
everyone knows about.

It wouldnnt take too long at all to get everything set up 'in one
place'.

I'll give Alcor an email if no one comes up with a better idea / if
we're all agreed.

On Nov 15, 6:57 pm, "Jon Stovell (a.k.a. Sesquipedalian)"

[Howard Melman]

Sounds like the best plan to me.

Howard

[nontoppo]

Another agree to use blacktree if alcor is willing to do this...