What is the process for getting Addons that were available in 5.1 made available for 5.2 thru the Addon Manager? When I look at the wiki page 5.2 Addons - Gramps it lists a number of Addons that are not actually available in 5.2 . The first couple I found were:
Data Entry Gramplet
GetGOV
I manually copied these from gramps51/plugins to gramps52/plugins in my local system and updated the version in the GPR file and they seemed to work (not extensively tested).
Just asking for guidance on how this should be done. I created the 2nd of these and want to know if I am supposed to do something. Other gramplets I created are in 5.2 without me doing anything.
@Nick-Hall
Are the classifications for Addons open for discussion?
For instance: the Text Import is classified as âDeveloperâ audience. Yet it seems like âExpertâ to me. And any Addon with a Prerequisite registered seems like it ought to be Expert audience level too.
We also need to discuss how to indicate Audience and Status in the Wiki. This filters are going to cause a lot of âthat is broken/missing on my machineâ postings.
We probably ought to linkify âaddon Statusâ and âaddon audienceâ in Discourse⌠or maybe âAddon Manager filtersâ. Iâm beginning to think that Addon Manager is the wrong phrase to linkify. The 3 tabs each will be separate stumbling blocks and the current wiki link is too generic.)
I will put in a 5.3 request to remember the Addon Manager filter setting. [filed 0013172: [5.3 Addon Manager] remember addon Filter selections] I donât want have to open the scopes of the Audience and Status filters every time I look for available updates.
The Audience broadly corresponds to the Use column, and the Status to the Rating column in the Addon list on the wiki. I reduced the number of options to make them easier to use and understand.
The classifications are open for discussion. In general, I am happy for developers to choose a suitable classifications for their addons.
It is absurd to have to lookup the meaning of a ânumber of Starsâ instead of simply having the Meaning explicitly in the column.
[filed 0013173: Addon List table column headers do not correspond to Addon Manager filter headers ]
Agreed that the filters categories correspond to those columns in the Addon List.
But I am worried about indicating elevated Audience or Status in the actual wikipage for each Addon. (Since the specific Addonâs wikipage is what we typically link to when suggesting an Addon to a newbie.)
Updating over a hundred separate MediaWiki pages will be prone to human error and inconsistencies.
How about âUser friendlyâ? Something to combat the common assumption that if it wasnât built-in then it isnât appropriate anyone but power users.
(And it might spur a number of suggestions for Addons that are not currently User Friendly but could be.)
âUser Friendlyâ is the most over used & terrifying phrase in the English
language all is dependent on knowledge and experience so if you are an
expert it is possibly friendly if you are novice then probably not. If
you have a bias in favour of one option over another then it becomes
âuser friendlyâ
Phil
âuser friendlyâ is certainly over used and abused. What suggestion do you have to make basic addons more inviting for users?
There is an assumption that they must be âaddonsâ because they are not sanctioned by the project or useful. This is hurting the average user.
[Note: A similar case in another project⌠I am well aware there are GIMP addons and that it is likely some would make GIMP a better experience for me. But I have never explored them because GIMP is already overwhelming. There are so many addons to peruse that I bail out of their addon interface after a minute or two.]
Novice, Intermediate, Advanced
Simple, Moderate, Complex
Basic, Better, Best
These all follow the same principles
Novice,Simple,Basic, stable, usable and more or less essential for
program use by a first time user.
Intermediate, Moderate, Better, for somebody who knows the basics and
what they are looking for, it is not built in but they know where to look.
Advanced, Complex, Best for user of many years experience of Family
Research and/or Programming, these are interesting but not vital to the
functioning of Gramps (example DNA) for the average family history
researcher.
So as an example currently a fresh install includes all language and
calendar options surely as part of the install process preferred
system/language can be selected and only that one installed rather than
having to remove them all bar the one you want.
Alternatively Primary & Secondary installed
The extreme of this would be have no add-ons as default installation but
a simple and efficient way of adding them testing to see how they work
and then removal or acceptance and only the accepted would be the ones
looked for as part of the update process.
Then build up history by looking at what is downloaded and upgraded to
influence the category they fall into.
I absolutely agree about GIMP and never go beyond a basic download which
is more than adequate for my needs. Is there a requirement to look at
what GRAMPS is capable of and effectively coming up with Basic Better
Best versions.
The difference between the filterâs âAll Audiencesâ and âEveryoneâ wasnât clear to me so I did not even change it, believing they are the same.
It might help to display a count of addons available with the current filter settings.
BTW, I discovered that simply hovering over any of the filter categories and scrolling the mouse wheel cycles through the optionsâŚa nice touch.
The new Addon Manager is a significant change so kudos for all the work. After installing 5.2.0-rc1, I simply wanted to install the addons I needed and the quickest way I found was to use the search box and I hadnât taken the time to explore what it offers.
After playing around with it today, Iâm curious about -
âAll Projectsâ filter - the only entry is Gramps. What else is anticipated? Could it be introduced when there is more than one option? [ moderator: There are already 2 in the wiki. But their owners have not authorized them as presets.]
âAll Audiencesâ I wonder if itâs really necessary to have this filter? As a Gramps user, how would I know which category an addon would be found in? What makes an addon good for Experts? It feels like it might be based on what one knows and is familiar with.
A display of the number of addons available based on the current filter settings would be helpful just know how the filter settings affected the list.
For updated addons, the version number of the addon would benefit from standing out in the listing, apart from the categories. For installed addons, the version is repeated on the left and right sides. Perhaps the version could always be shown on the right?
The current UI is flashy but it doesnât add value both when I know which addon I am looking for and when i am simply exploring. When I know which addon I need, the search box is the fastest way. When I am just exploring the amount of scrolling doesnât entice me - being able to view a larger list at a glance is better.
The three most useful filters for my use are âAll addonsâ âAll typesâ and âStableâ.
We need people with GitHub Access to attack the help_url deficit for plugin registrations to add more value for âExplorersâ before the release of 5.2!
The Wiki button can appear for MORE than just gramplets now. So users can learn more about an Addon before installing ⌠if the links in the wikiâs Addon List are transcribed to the .gpr.py file in the 5.2 (maintenance) addons source. (A new build of the .tgz archives and addonlist JSON file is easy with the make.py file.)
For instance the following Addon List link for DNA Segment Map in https://www.gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php/Addon:DNASegmentMapGramplet
becomes the following Gramps Plugin Registration line: help_url="Addon:DNASegmentMap",
@emyoulation Thanks for the replies and adding all this information in the wikis. BTW, no, I havenât read the PRs related to the development of Addon Manager.
Ah! Completely missed the link between the Projects filter and the Projects tab (duh!). I didnât associate the word Projects with âaddon repositoryâ but itâs clear now. This is an important feature which Iâd suggested, perhaps ahead of itâs time, in 12193
There have been a lot of grumbles about delays in having Addon updates vetted and posted to the official project repository. And about the misery of maintaining an addons-source fork with all that clutter.
But, the combination of a tiny GitHub folder with the make.py creates an opportunity to easily publish your own repository project until your contribution fights free from the red tape monster. (Windows users still have to install a Python devel environment to use of that make.py file. But the linux distro already has it.)
The new user interface is heavily influenced by Matthias Kemmerâs addon listings web page. The feedback just from the testing has been great, I expect more when a wider audience gets to see it.
Some ideas for the next version:
Add a thumbnail image to each addon.
Allow users to remove addons.
Improve the filters - make the labels clickable, display a count of selected addons.
