[Naming poll] Packages
Poll

What should be the new name for Packages in Wedge?

Plugins (and I'm not from an English speaking country)
11 (44%)
Plugins (and English is my main language)
4 (16%)
Add-ons (and I'm not from an English speaking country)
3 (12%)
Add-ons (and English is my main language)
7 (28%)
Total Members Voted: 24

Nao

  • Dadman with a boy
  • Posts: 16,072
[Naming poll] Packages
« on July 12th, 2011, 05:22 PM »Last edited on July 12th, 2011, 11:53 PM by Nao/Gilles
Considering the number of upcoming changes in the package system (and the fact that no single 'package' will work on SMF without a serious rewrite), we decided last year to rename the feature.
We settled on Add-ons, but a recent discussion made us reconsider the question. It is apparent that many, if not most SMF users call packages 'mods' and will continue to do so under Wedge. So it might make sense to use 'mods' to begin with.

Feel free to chip in!

spoogs

  • Posts: 417
[Naming poll] Re: Packages
« Reply #1, on July 12th, 2011, 05:48 PM »
Whats' the outcome of the discussion about whether or not code edits would be allowed?

I'm personally not in the least concerned about what things are 'officially' termed but the following comes to mind:
Plugins/Add-ons/Modules - adds new features/functions with minimal code edits (if any)[1]
Modifications/Hacks - adds new features/functions by modifying the code[2]
Tips & Tricks - just messes about with existing code without adding new features
 1. more like from the experienced modders
 2. more likely from the not so experienced modders or those still learning
Stick a fork in it SMF

Arantor

  • As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
  • Posts: 14,278
[Naming poll] Re: Packages
« Reply #2, on July 12th, 2011, 05:53 PM »
Quote
Whats' the outcome of the discussion about whether or not code edits would be allowed?
Good question. Officially, it's that I'm still trying to take on board all the feedback, toss it into a blender and figure out how to make something that works for everyone. I suspect the final answer will be that code edits will be allowed, but strongly discouraged.

But I'm agreeing with your definitions and it is the mods/hacks group I want to specifically target for reduction because experience suggests it causes more problems than it solves. (It does solve problems no other solution can, but when it's the prime solution, it causes more problems.)
When we unite against a common enemy that attacks our ethos, it nurtures group solidarity. Trolls are sensational, yes, but we keep everyone honest. | Game Memorial

spoogs

  • Posts: 417
[Naming poll] Re: Packages
« Reply #3, on July 12th, 2011, 06:01 PM »
I probably should have added this to the existing discussion but I'll stick it here for now.

[1]I think the code edits should be allowed but discouraged, reason is that it can be a stepping stone for those who dont understand hooks much or aren't as versed in fiding the ones they need. For example if a package is submitted[2] that mostly modifies code but it adds new features/functions and has no security issues it ahould be approved but noted to the mod author that there are ways to get it done without so many edits... so now it's up to that author to try and improve their work to plugin/add-on quality[3].
 1. I'm no coder/programmer by any means
 2. assuming there will be a review process of sorts
 3. at least that's my simplistic take on it

Arantor

  • As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
  • Posts: 14,278
[Naming poll] Re: Packages
« Reply #4, on July 12th, 2011, 06:07 PM »
Quote
reason is that it can be a stepping stone for those who dont understand hooks much or aren't as versed in fiding the ones they need
I see a problem in that logic, and it's the same reason I wanted to take them out: if you leave them in, people will use them even when there are better ways because it's what they're used to. People are still using edits when hooks can do the job better.

I'd rather 'encourage', with a cricket bat if necessary, them to do it more cleanly. On the other hand, that presumes that we're going to be doing an official panel review of mods before users get to see them, and I'd rather not go down that road if I can help it. Been there, learned from it - you can encourage users to do it better all you like but unless you flat out say "I will not approve that until you do x", mod authors don't. There is at least one - but probably more - mod out that I ended up totally rewriting because the mod author didn't understand the objection I rose to their work, but they refused to learn how to improve their work so afterwards they never submitted another mod.

What I can see happening is that I'll end up writing a ton of mods and so on. Only then I'll have to support them, argh.

Nao

  • Dadman with a boy
  • Posts: 16,072
[Naming poll] Re: Packages
« Reply #5, on July 12th, 2011, 06:16 PM »
Here's how I see it (I feel like I've said it already?):
- Authors can do what they want,
- Then they can upload their mod to wedge.org or whatever through a customized AeMe download system,
- Then users will vote on whether they like it or not...
- And a mention will appear in big red bold letters saying the mod is using file edits. This mention will either be added by user votes, flag (set by the team), or 'simply' by looking into the mod files and searching for anything that modifies the files.

The goal being to educate users into preferring a plugin-type mod, rather than a hack-type mod.
Of course, if a mod is all alone in its own category, whether it has file edits or not doesn't matter. But if it has file edits, and someone suddenly makes a similar mod without file edits, users will automatically switch to it. I think.

Ps: guys, could you elaborate on your votes? I did do it for my own :P

spoogs

  • Posts: 417
[Naming poll] Re: Packages
« Reply #6, on July 12th, 2011, 06:20 PM »
@ Arantor - Fair enough assessment and I agree, I was also of the mindset that if a modder submits a package with much edits and doesn't improve upon it by moving to fewer edits where possible and someone else[1] provides a cleaner package so be it.

:edit: Just seeing Nao's post and yeah that's more along the lines I was heading I guess.

 1. not necessarily you :P

Road Rash Jr.

  • Posts: 76
[Naming poll] Re: Packages
« Reply #7, on July 12th, 2011, 06:21 PM »
I voted for add-on because they add to the functionality of wedge.
Stick a FORK in it, it's done.
(Error 69) No Seniors Porn Found Here

Nao

  • Dadman with a boy
  • Posts: 16,072

Norodo

  • Oh you Baidu, so randumb. (60 sites being indexed at once? Jeez)
  • Posts: 469
[Naming poll] Re: Packages
« Reply #9, on July 12th, 2011, 06:57 PM »
Modules, like Drupal. It only makes sense.

Road Rash Jr.

  • Posts: 76

[Naming poll] Re: Packages
« Reply #11, on July 12th, 2011, 07:43 PM »
Packs works for me, because any given pack (compressed file) could be a modification, a module, an add-on or a plug-in, none of which are really the same thing.
I shall continue to be an impossible person as long as those who are now possible remain possible

Nao

  • Dadman with a boy
  • Posts: 16,072
[Naming poll] Re: Packages
« Reply #12, on July 12th, 2011, 07:47 PM »
Well... A modification is different yeah, but a module, an add-on and a plugin are the same to me. Potato potato ;)

Alanthar

  • Congratulations. :)
  • Posts: 22
[Naming poll] Re: Packages
« Reply #13, on July 12th, 2011, 11:13 PM »
Add-on.
Adding functionality on top of wedge without interrupting the core.

Nao

  • Dadman with a boy
  • Posts: 16,072
[Naming poll] Re: Packages
« Reply #14, on July 12th, 2011, 11:55 PM »
Okay, I've removed the least voted option (Modifications), and I'm asking you guys to make up your mind :P
It's hard to make a decision at that point, considering all of the three last options have as many votes (okay, Plugins has less, but it's my second best choice :P)
:edit: Enabled ability to change your vote.

@Alanthar: again, this... definition would apply to 'mods' and 'plugins' as well.