Request - Remove unsupported version badges

[masterchief]

Thinking about it more, if the concern is the real-estate the badges take up, remove the "Joomla" from the badge. If the concern is about advertising legacy versions, make the legacy version badges dull, grey (or bright red if grey could be misinterpreted as unsupported on this version) and with a different shape (so that color blind people can tell the difference). Those are quick wins you could do today and it I can't see that anyone would have a problem with it.

[masterchief]

Would appear 1.5 is going to get a stay of execution: https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgr ... jY3GXtXNYQ

I'm pretty sure that will go through so it makes my original question moot (for now). However, I certainly would like to see that blog come out sooner rather than later about any retirement strategy the JED has in mind for listings of 1.5-only extensions (full disclosure: I do have a few).

[Vimes]

Would appear 1.5 is going to get a stay of execution:

What does that have to do with listing 1.5 only extensions on the JED? JED doesn't need to follow the rest of the project's lead on this.

[masterchief]

What does that have to do with listing 1.5 only extensions on the JED? JED doesn't need to follow the rest of the project's lead on this.

Can you explain what you mean by that?

[Vimes]

We want to wean people off 1.5? You're not going to do that by on one hand telling them that it's only got a few months of support left and on the other hand, offering them extensions for it. People like to stick with what they know, so without some gentle encouragement they'll just keep installing 1.5.

I'm as fond of 1.5 as anybody, she's been a wonderful workhorse for all of us, but 2.5 is an excellent replacement and we need to be encouraging people to use that instead.

[masterchief]

I can't fault your reasoning, but I'm sure you've given your customers warning in the past when you are going to discontinue a product or service. I certainly did

[Vimes]

I'm sure you've given your customers warning in the past when you are going to discontinue a product or service.

Not always, no, sometimes you need to react quickly to changing situations, but in the case of J1.5 I posted this in January : http://www.jomres.net/news/9-news/jomre ... a-15-17-25

[Josh Lewis]

Agreed with Vimes. At first glance I did not like having to change over to Joomla 1.7 considering that I had troubles with jupgrade (although it worked, but left some pieces in my database that made me feel uncomfortable). So I was the founder and writer of the "Manual Process of Upgrading J 1.5 to 1.7" as seen here:
http://docs.joomla.org/Migrating_from_J ... ate_Joomla

Once I had the entire process figured out I was very pleased to upgrade my site to joomla 1.7 and then to joomla 2.5. Although J 1.5 served it's purpose, I like J 2.5 a lot! I've noticed at least in my case a significant reduction in the amount of errors that I see when installing many extensions. Although one of my clients still uses J 1.5 for a template reasons, I still support the idea that J 1.5 should end support soon. Some day I'll have to give them an upgrade when the time is right.

[masterchief]

... but in the case of J1.5 I posted this in January : http://www.jomres.net/news/9-news/jomre ... a-15-17-25

That's appropriate notice.

[horus_68]

My 2 cents summary:
1- space used by badges = not a problem but if required they can be smaller (using the ones without the word "Joomla!").

2- Approve new 1.5 extensions- definitively no and that should be announced by JED!
Rule should be clean and simple:
RULE: "JED only approves new extensions that works with the current LTS version or the current STS version"
That works with all future releases and avoid JED to have its own timetable.

3- 1.5 extensions already published on JED they stay listed past EOL of the joomla version itself (the Joomla version EOL on JED usually its longer, remember the 1.0 move). Unfortunately there is not a particular timeframe, so this should be normalized to x mounts after the EOL for that version. This would be used for all future versions of Joomla.
RULE: "JED will unpublish extensions that only works with a particular Joomla version 2 months after that Joomla version EOL"

4- To clean up things and show a message to users (and developers)... the extensions not available for 2.5 should be listed below the 2.5 versions. So that should be the first criteria ordering extensions on each JED category. This rule will also be useful for future Joomla developments, so we don't need to have this discussion again on 3.5 and so on!
New rule for TOS
"An extension not available for the current LTS (long term support) version or the most actual STS will be listed last place in JED category view!"

With those simple rules that post will not be created again on 3.0, 3.5 and so on. True?

[masterchief]

RULE: "JED only approves new extensions that works with the current LTS version or the current STS version"

Agree.

RULE: "JED will unpublish extensions that only works with a particular Joomla version 2 months after that Joomla version EOL"

I think 2 months is too soon and I think "1.5" is a special case because of the "migration" aspect. This, I believe, isn't going to be as big an issue for 2.5 to 3.0 because that will still be an upgrade. I would rather see some flexibility adopted, something like this:

"The status of extensions that do not support the current LTS or STS will be reviewed by OSM+LT every 3 months after EOL of the appropriate version. If unpublishing those extensions is found in the best interests of the community (based on community and lister feedback), then a minimum of 3 months notice will be given for unpublishing of those extensions."

That gives 1.5 extensions at least 6 months past EOL which I think is fair at a minimum. If OSM and the LT is still seeing massive traffic (aka "income potential" - mercenary I know, but hey, that's the reality) at the 3 month review, they might consider putting unpublishing off for another 3 months. At some point, demand for 1.5 is going to drop naturally but the reality is, and the anecdotal figures would suggest that 2.5 is only 10% of the market at the moment. At any rate, put the decision into the hands of the whole leadership so the JED doesn't feel under pressure to make the call (I think it's a decision that impacts the whole project but I think it's one that can vary from one LTS to the next, as is certainly the case for 1.5).

New rule for TOS
"An extension not available for the current LTS (long term support) version or the most actual STS will be listed last place in JED category view!"

I would turn that around to be less negative and say:

"Extensions that support the current LTS and STS will be given preferential ordering in any listing category."

[alledia]

Guys, I've hesitated to do this for a while now. As someone who's been on the JED staff and in other similar positions, I know how life gets in the way and other things become more important than Joomla volunteering.

However, by allowing Joomla 1.6 and 1.7 badges on the JED, we're actively promoting unsafe software, confusing our users and causing extra work for devs.

The JED team leadership really needs to step up on this. If they don't have time, they should step down and hand over to someone who does.

This thread is over three and a half months old now. Let's get this fixed.

[Josh Lewis]

We could also use a Thank You button here. I have to agree once again with the above poster.

[vdrover]

To my knowledge there is only one person who can make this change. I have emailed him on numerous occasions without reply. I wish I could say there was a fallback workflow but after 3 years on the JED I don't know what it is.

[Vimes]

Thanks for trying anyway, Victor.

[alikon]

Despite the discussion is very interesting
i have to remember you that we are going a bit off topic
so could i ask you that someone strat another topic for the JED "issue"
cause i've understand that seem not possible to change something from the JED team
as vdrover wrote
but from your signature seems that yuo are a member of jed team
what i don't understand?

[masterchief]

Regardless of who has server/site access to change code or whatever (I'm really not interested in the internal politicking), what's the decision?

[brian]

Thats the problem - it seems that two JED editors have expressed their views here but they are unable to contact the JED leader to either confirm a decision or implement a decision

[alledia]

Apparently the JED leadership hasn't had time in the last 3 and a half months to fix this problem, reply to this thread or reply to emails from its own staff members.

However, within one day of this complaint going public, they have time to fire the JED staff who complained. The JED has already been updated to remove them: http://extensions.joomla.org/component/ ... article/30

This is not how the JED or any area of the Joomla project should be run.

The JED needs new version badges of course, but it also needs new leadership.

[brian]

Thats a DISGUSTING state of affairs

[Saka]

Clearly there are issues on this team. Luckily, there are also people who would wake up in the middle of the night to address an urgent issue. Looks like some shifting is all that's needed.

[Vimes]

Thats a DISGUSTING state of affairs

+1M

[tresan]

The problem is the JED leadership - nothing more nothing less.

The crew on JED is doing a good job and its hard work at times but it strikes me time after time that the leadership is simply incapable of running the team and is far from able to or interested in dialogue with the community.

JED clearly needs a new leadership and needs to finish the modernizations process it should go through.

Any action taken by the JED should happen with due cause in clear and see through guidelines and policies and the amount of doubt issues and very strange resolutions of such cases in the last years time should make it very easy to see something is completely wrong.

So as one of the largest extension providers on the planet and owner and CEO of the biggest Joomla consultant house on the planet i strongly urge the project leadershop to get the JED back on tracks and appoint the right people to lead it.

[Hils]

Perhaps it is time for this thread to be renamed "Remove unsupported leadership". This situation is not due to lack of volunteers, it is due to lack of acceptance of volunteers.

[hamanaka]

I'm kind of a Joomla extension fanatic, I have been working hard over in the site showcase for a few years, it is also running Mosets tree. I would really like to help out with the JED.

By the way, the tags are useless if you can't filter or sort by version.

[mark_up]

There needs to be a place where people can bring things to light without fear of reprisals. There are horror stories that people can't mention because their livelihoods depend on a JED listing.

[Radek Suski]

Thats a DISGUSTING state of affairs

+1


I don't know exactly what's going on at the moment but I think the community suffer a lot from the current situation.
The JED team is awesome and doing a hell of job but they're clearly overloaded.

We, Sigrid and me wanted to join the team to be helpful but for some reason, I guess exactly the same reason, there is abolutelly no response.
I can imagine many other people are in similar situation.
It's really a pity

[Webdongle]

+1 on removing 1.5, 1.6, 1.7

[mlipscomb]

For those interested, the blog post that I said was going to be posted is here: http://community.joomla.org/blogs/leade ... pport.html

Since this discussion has wandered so off-topic, it's now locked. Please take a moment to read the blog post and if you have ideas you wish to discuss, feel free to post in the J!People discussion linked in the blog.