| rkoller |
@chrisfromredfin should the module examples and anti modules examples also added to the maintainers questionnaire? |
| rkoller |
i rather lean to leave it out for one to see how the scope notes work out and how clear those are and also because of the lack of space :D |
| chrisfromredfin |
That's a really good question. 🙂 Some of those modules might be something the people are trying to sort! |
| chrisfromredfin |
I think for all those reasons that's the way I lean. If we were to include it, I would do it like as an appendix, like "if you really can't figure out from the description, we've provided a list" - but not all categories have a robust list, so leave it out for now |
| rkoller |
i’ve increased the page format for the moment from ~A4 to A3 to being able to pack everything onto single pages. but styling will be at the end. at the moment i wanted to get all the infos from the draft over. not completely done yet. but the rough outline stands. |
| rkoller |
@chrisfromredfin i’ve transferred the draft over to the google doc. i guess the steps i thought of are roughly in as well as the data from the proposed definitions spreadsheet.if you could take a look in regards of wording and if i missed anything. and check if everything is crystal clear and concise. from a native speaker perspective ( i have the feeling a few sentences are a bit “german” wording wise. ;) )but again the idea . only have the list of category terms on the first page .so maintainers dont read the scope notes alongside.on the next page the terms and scope notes and a column at the end to rate how well the expectation is met. (on that page the instructions and the rating coding explained first. then term and scope note read and then the rating could be given)and in the last section after familiarizing people get the instruction to fill in their modules. and also the addition in case they have any complaints or comments about the previous terms and scope notes they could leave those in the notes section of each term.question should we also add the scope notes there as well again? so everything is in place. or should we create a second google doclink in portrait mode with a term and scope note table that could be placed in a second window alongside so sorting is easier? |
| rkoller |
and i am not sure maybe we should add a few more words to the introduction about the steps taken so far. meaning to convey it isnt an early draft. meaning there was the bof in prague and based on that were discussions. that lead to the first questionnaire. based on that more in depth discussion and testing which lead to the draft we have here and we hope to further stabilize. |
| rkoller |
and it might be an idea to curate an additional list of modules, tricky ambiguous ones for folks with not that many modules they maintain. cuz i think there might a be few that would be definitely valuable for diversity of the group. i think some folks from the diversity and inclusion channel might be valuable. yesct hasnt too many modules she or they maintain/s but as far as i know long time drupal user as well as active in mentoring as well as in the diversity and inclusion. same goes for amyjune who is already on the list. their perspectives would be super valuable. |
| chrisfromredfin |
OK, this is wonderful. I have:edited for grammar / native language (there wasn't much)added some clarity to instructions where necessaryadded some formatting to the "Fit" column so the symbols will be big and centeredput in page breaks between the sections instead of just a bunch of line feedsadded some spacing between each category table to make sure it's clear which table goes with which category (and extra line feed under each table)added an appendix at the end; not sure if we want to do this or not - they're available on their module pages. There's also someone with 239 modules. Should we tell those folks to pick... how many, 20? - I think we might save the hand-picked modules for a separate exercise... alternatively, we could provide 20 hand-picked to certain folks, or even to everyone?(edited) |
| chrisfromredfin |
Also, noticed "Administrator Tools" is still in there, and not alphabetical. I assume we are doing alphabetical here, yes? |
| rkoller |
Also, noticed “Administrator Tools” is still in there, and not alphabetical. I assume we are doing alphabetical here, yes?good catch. that was due to the fact that i had one document open with the old categories list and one with the new. and at one time i’Ve mixed up things.i will go through your changes now. i ’ve already followed along. and all looked good. i love your additions to the + 0 and minus. in regards of the introduction i might have one or two comments. but will do after late night snack. but only small details. and one note the questionnaire also needs a new issue. at the moment it is the old.and i’Venoticed i forgot the most important part about a hybrid sort :D and you noticed already the part where i’ve started to add and catched up while i was answering in here :D |
| rkoller |
brb . noodles are ready. |
| chrisfromredfin |
Another thought - I wonder if we could put the tables "2-up" on an ultra-wide page, so that they could see more on one screen at a time? (This is why I do like the idea of "card sorting" because it's a lot of scrolling to put things where they belong) |
| chrisfromredfin |
And yes, Background was really off the cuff so hoping you can take a good look and polish that up |
| chrisfromredfin |
I've gotta go clean out the car I'm selling tomorrow, back in 30 or so |
| rkoller |
you were right. the administrator tools was just an additional add by accident. removed it. and on the hand developer experiencewas missing with a dedicated small table. |
| rkoller |
in regards of the portrait mode. i’ve left a comment and filled in an example. i am not sure. in regular as well as portrait mode both suboptimal. |
| rkoller |
ok added a few comments and made a few changes around the instructions for point 3. also started to curate a list of ambiguous module to choose from for people with less than 30 modules maintained.and in regards of the introduction i am a bit too tired to come up with a suggestion for a an alternative draft. i’ve just outlined proposed changes in a comment. but i thing with a bit cleaning and streamlining the questionnaire should be ready to go soon. the steps are outlined quite clear already.am off to bed now. half past three soon. good luck tomorrow with your car sale. but sounds like the deal is already done and dusted. ;) good night. we read tomorrow. |
| chrisfromredfin |
yeah, look again with fresh eyes! thanks for everything, Ralf! |
| rkoller |
quickly added the missing links for the suggestion to the curated list of modules. but now really off today. and yep we’ll continue tomorrow. and also thanks to you. the iterations were good today. |
| leslieg |
I would lean towards asking those with many modules to pick the 20 or so most popular modules, not just pick 20. |
| rkoller |
maintainers with enough modules in their list have one advantage about folks how sorted modules in the first questionnaire. they have a clear idea what their module is about. that way they dont have to search and look up the exact scope what a module is about. that way it should be way fast to sort modules. in particular if at least a few of the category terms are rather stable already and clear what they are about. that way sorting is fast and also not much write up necessary about the reasoning. therefore i think ~30 would be “ok” and if folks are motivated they could do even more if they have (the more the better to be honest.for folks with way less than 30 modules it is the same case like in the first round it might be a bit more time consuming. for those picking from the curated list maybe less picks might be required (i will add an addition to that section - am currently going through the questionnaire).but in regards of which modules to pick. i would leave it up to the maintainers. the diverse and fringe the better to be honest. if you let maintainers pick the most popular modules in their eyes it might be that there might be much overlap between the list of modules each one notes.and i guess a diverse list of modules might be better this time. also due to the fact it is a hybrid sort and there is the option to create new categories in case a module doesn’t fit well in any of the given categories. |
| rkoller |
and if anyone of you has ideas and suggestions for more ambiguous and tricky to sort modules for the curated list please add, currently the count is at nine. (already picked from the list in the google spreadsheet and example from our discussions) |
| rkoller |
@chrisfromredfin i am done going through the google doc. guess it might only need some native speaker smoothing ;) but content wise it looks close imho. |
| chrisfromredfin |
wonderful! That's my plan this morning |
| rkoller |
went over your changes and left a reply in the last open comment. aside that it looks quite clean and mostly ready to go. and i was surprised that there weren’t that many points you had to correct in the introduction. my version sounded rougher than the edits look like now.and i will search a few more potentially tricky and ambiguous modules for the list. so folks have more to draw from. |
| rkoller |
and as i wrote in the comments feel free to ask for more input in regards of the visual presentation of the category tables. |
| chrisfromredfin |
:+1: |
| rkoller |
ok there are 23 or 24 modules in the list now. that should be enough. and one detail i forgot. for those with very few own projects who pick from that list. they should sort less than the suggested 30 for those who have more than that maintained. cuz the latter takes way less time sorting while if you dont know projects and you have to check first it takes way more time. |
| chrisfromredfin |
yes, good point |
| rkoller |
looks good now. i tend trying to avoid parenthesis but it is ok that way - thats just a stylistic nitpick of mine. and the text itself reads good for the comment you’ve added. thanks! so the document looks good overall.the only things left to do is that you, leslie and others check the list of additional modules . if the list is ok that way or if it could need one or two more or different modules? and the question if we need more style adjustments for the doc.but aside that the only thing left to do is open a new issue to replace the old one at the top. after that people on the list might be contacted? (edited) |
| rkoller |
had one last idea during cooking dinner. added a comment at the very end of the document. |
| chrisfromredfin |
Yes I think it's good to have a summary or something. Maybe just open-ended? (also replied to your comment). Besides that and creating the issue, it very well may be just ready to go! |
| chrisfromredfin |
We may want to put the rest of the small group's eyes on it and then perhaps we can start reaching out to people. |
| rkoller |
replied with a suggestion for the task. |
| rkoller |
and have you had a chance to take a look at the list of modules to sort. is it ok that way, or are there too many or too few modules or should some of them be replaced? |
| chrisfromredfin |
they fit on a page; I wouldn't do any more 🙂 they're good examples, some popular some problematic. |
| chrisfromredfin |
if anything we could stand to remove 4 or so, but I think it's likely fine. it's just a suggestion |
| rkoller |
yep i agree. just wanted to make sure the list was taken a look at and not missed. so if we come to an agreement on the closing task the document is ready to go |
Comments
Comment #7
leslieg commented