Category Structure

On Geneanet site’s forum, of course there’s genealogical search and technical forums but there also is a “bistrot” (pub) forum to discusse anything else about genealogy.

Discourse generates a lot of messages on regular mailing list. Equivalent messages on Discourse forum could be in this kind of “pub” forum.

Another kind of category could be foreign language categories. Gramps is internationalized. Geneanet Gramps forum in French is active. May be some non English speaking Gramps users could have their own forum in their language on Discourse: German, Danish, Spanish, French…

Third idea: regular usages of Gramps vs more specifics or new like DNA. May be clustered in something like a “Use cases” forum.

Here’s a revised list for proposed subcategories under Support

  • People
  • Relationships
  • Families
  • Events
  • Charts
  • Places
  • Sources, Citations & Repositories
  • Media
  • Notes
  • Reports
  • Filters
  • Add-ons, Gramplets & Tools
  • Import & Export
  • Localization
  • The Database

I am not sure if “Localization” is the term we should use here. It is the term used in bug reports and by the developers but would the casual user know this refers to the translations, etc. Any other ideas, or will a description of the category suffice?

While Nick has said it is easy to move threads into Categories after their creation, that means someone would need to do that, We could do this ourselves by posting to the right area. As I stated at the top, having the subcategories may also help us stay on topic.

If you think this is the way we should proceed, please Like :heart: the post so we can get a sense of what the group wants. And of course, if you think any other categories may be needed.

An additional Category suggestion deals with New Features.

Should this be a subcategory with the others above or its own top tier Category

If you think this is the way we should proceed, please Like :heart: the post so we can get a sense of what the group wants.

Two other suggestions for categories are not specific to the Gramps software.

Do we want to expand the discourse here to general genealogy discussions dealing with tips and techniques and the how-to of basic genealogy research.

The other category suggested a category dedicated to discussions in languages other than English. Again, is this a direction we want to take this discourse.

If you think this is the way we should proceed, please Like :heart: the post so we can get a sense of what the group wants.

I’m wondering… isn’t this sorta like taking a step down the path of recreating the wiki? It seems like that would be a misstep. As much as the wiki has become chaotic and a fresh start seems appealing, it adds another layer of confusion for users already backsliding on our steep learning curve. (The wiki currently has 1,921 contents pages!)

Building a comprehensive framework almost imposes strictures on the discussion directions.



I tend to agree. Let’s keep the number of categories small to start with.

Perhaps we should start by renaming “Support” to “Help”, and adding “Ideas” for feature requests and “Genealogy” for non-Gramps related discussions?

1 Like

I like the idea of fewer categories.

1 Like

It would be great if you could add a “Roadmap” category, where the features comming in next version would be listed…
That way people wouldn’t easily find what was planned for next version…

It do not need to list anything but new planned features or changes for Gramps…

1 Like

Or we could just looks at the 3 places where such things are managed and look for ourselves.

The GEPS list has the big design changes that require lots of discussion.

You can see the narrower scope items by looking through the pulls on GitHub

And the MantisBT bug tracker lists the things that have been fixed. It has its own Roadmap feature.

Do you really think that new users are going to go through the GEPS list and try to figure out whats actually comming in the next version or do you think they will just make a new topic with a question ?

99% will just create a new question/topic and leave it to others to maintain the lists…

Its about trying to be userfriendly for the users of the software.
Sorry to say but the GEPS system is as messy to search as the mail list on sourceforge was, there can be 3-4-5 different GEPS for a topic/feature and you need to know the system to figure out whats actually going into the next version or not…

Regarding github, how many users of Gramps do you know how to navigate github? most users do not even know what github are !

MantisBT, same as the GEPS and maillist, for normal users its not user friendly! all of those are tools for developers, not normal users of a software.
And the roadmap there is for bugs, not for new features …

I see you keep on the negativity for any suggestions from me, i really don’t know why, but it would be great if you just stopped commenting on my posts instead of using so much negative energy !

I’m sorry, but I thought this was a forum for all users and that everyone was welcome to come with suggestions, not only the few in the “inner circle”

If this is an important enough item to you, maybe you should take on the task. That’s how Open Source works!

There’s already a roadmap-like feature for each release. What you’re talking about now is a presales or marketing feature. Are presales & marketing really applicable in Open Source?

Why would a community want to build pent-up demand in a group of people not even willing to make the effort to look through the existing documentation? That’s probably not the kind of person who’s likely to become a contributing member instead of a complainer.

I think the documentation being more User Friendly would cut down on people repeatedly asking the same basic (and reasonable!) questions. That would help let the Discussions on the maillist (& here) cover more challenging subjects. Since I have experience in that arena, that’s where I contribute.

Discussions have different points of view. I’m not trolling… I supported some of your points and disagreed with others. Others have disagreed with my points with cogent arguments. I appreciate that. Lets not let things devolve into personality & attitude.

(And I’m not inner circle… merely vocal. My ideas get shot down a LOT. Often appropriately.)


You really have a lot to learn !

You need to understand that most users that use gramps or any other open source software that have public releases and want users to use the software, the majority of users will be people that dont know anything about WIKI, Python, Programming or Databases !

Most users do not have any knowledge of anything but their genealogy research, and struggle even with simple desktop tasks, and at least not about systems developed for developers by developers…

You need to step down from your high saddle and get up of your bubble and understand that there are people that want to use Gramps because of the software and the features, and many of them will have trouble logging into any of the systems used by the gramps project…

I dont care if there is a roadmap or not, this was a suggestion for a category in the forum that would be a place where users easily could see what was planned, instead of asking questions about it…

But you may not understand that some users actually ask questions or suggest feature that can benefit other users?

And again, I had a plan to contribute, both with data and a complete setup for Norwegian sources for the forms gramplet, but the attitude from you and Ron have made me drop it…
… I also dropped publishing the detailed howto use OpenRefine for Gramps data cleanup in the wiki because of you.

… I have a near finished converter from Legacy database to Gramps xml, but thanks to you, I’ll keep it to myself… I’m so tired of you attacking anything comment I do, so its no longer any fun or interest to contribute or help… so from being one that wanted to contribute, you alone have got me to be “just another user”… I have actuially used the last year learning python to be able to contribute, but… you stopped that interest a few month ago, and you are doing it again !

I have temporarily closed this topic because the tone of the discussion was getting slightly unpleasant. Please read the FAQ/Guidelines, especially the section Be Agreeable, Even When You Disagree. Let’s keep this a civilized place for discussion.

I’ll open this again shortly.

1 Like

I was think about a category for this myself. The whole idea behind creating this forum was to open discussion to a wider audience. That includes making the development process more transparent and encouraging user feedback. My post about PR #941 was the first step in this direction, and I will probably create a “New Features” category. This could contain topics for selected pull requests with screenshots to help explain the proposed changes.

The GEPS is often too technical for the average user and I don’t expect many users to browse through pull requests for the same reason. The bug tracker roadmap is really only used for bugs, not new features. We have a roadmap on the wiki, but I don’t think that it is up to date at the moment.

How would a “New Feature” category be different than “Development”?

As I understand it “Ideas” is a place to throw an idea out there for debate and see if there is a sense that the idea should be implemented. Your Date quality in GEDCOM exports seems to fit that category. The idea has been proposed, should we do it?

The PR #941 Age Stats is well underway and I see the “Development” would be where this would be discussed. Unless you see the Development category to be more on the technical side; more of the How-To.

I am not throwing water on the idea just entering the discourse.

“Ideas” is certainly the place for anyone to throw out new ideas.

I see “Development” more for technical discussion. Once a developer would like to implement an idea they should discuss the design first and get approval before coding.

What I was hoping to do with the “New Features” category is to show users new features that are currently being developed for the next release and get some feedback. PR #941 was just the first example. The idea is to make the development process more visible to users. Developers already use GitHub for this purpose.

I agree that there is some degree of overlap though.

The quality modifier for compound dates in GEDCOM exports is more technical. We are proposing to remove a feature in order to increase compliance with a standard. This should also be of interest to anyone who uses GEDCOM exports though.