3
 Followers
23
 Likes

[Forge] Mechanism that allows revamping old Forge components

Community Forge
On our radar

As the community grows, we get an increasing number of inactive users.


As natural as that is for any social network, that also means we'll have an increasing number of outdated Forge components.


I believe that goes against the goals of helping the community with brand-new, cutting edge components.


Whenever I find a component that I'd like to use, but it's old and/or deprecated, I try to convince their authors to add me onto their team so I can update it. A recent example is the CodeMirror component, which stopped receiving updates since platform version 7.


However, that does not always work. If the author of a given component went inactive, his/her component lays there forever and nobody else can update/improve upon it.


An example is the TinyMCE component, for which I tried to contact its author asking him to accept me into his team so I can update it; since I didn't hear back from him, I had to upload a separate component named InputToTinyMCE, ultimately splitting the same plugin into two components and forcing the community user to decide which of the two should be used.


I have a couple of suggestions to overcome this situation which I expect to become more and more common in the future years.


  1. Disable components (so that a new one can be created with the same name) that do not have a version compatible with the latest 2 major platform versions (e.g. P9.1 and P10) -- after giving a prior notice to its author(s).
  2. Allow other users to join teams whose components haven't received new versions in a while (maybe taking into account a minimum required community rank or forge score for security reasons).
  3. If items 1 and 2 are not applicable: any other mechanism that allows new users to contribute to "dead" components that may clutter Forge in the long run.



Created on 1 May
Comments (5)

Good point! This should really be taken into consideration. 

Changed the category to Community Forge


Like the idea, not really on the points you mention.


1) Components made in version 6-7-8 can still be useful and with SS you can upgrade it to a newer version.

2 & 3) I wouldn't like the option you can join the team by yourself. I think for this cases it should be possible to contact OS which can make it possible when you can show the 'owner' doesn't react on messages.


Kind regards,
Evert

Hi, Evert.


The main concern here is not about upgrading the OML version; it’s about keeping components fresh and new.


A component which hasn’t recieved updates since two major platform versios (2 years +-) is very likely deprecated.


As for your suggestion about contacting the OutSystems team: I just don’t see that happening. That would require one of their staff to manually judge whether the component is really deprecated or not and trust the information that their author went inactive. As reasonable as that might sound, it would be hard to justify it without a proper rule.


In fact, I’ve been contacted by the staff suggesting me to add a description to my own InputToTinyMCE component making it clear that it’s the most up-to-date TinyMCE component at forge (which will become another problem once I stop updating it)... so yeah, they aren’t removing the older one and I can totally understand that.

Changed the status to
On our radar


Hi Caio, 

As I said before, during this and next quarter, we will work hard to grow the forge into a marketplace of high-quality components.

So I have set the status to “On our radar”. I’ll post an update once we have a solution to this problem!

Cheers 

Ana Sequeira

views
548
Followers
3