CMS Made Simple Forums

Hello,

I am concerned about Quality Assurance for external modules. I tried some of them mostly marked as Production/Stable by Development Status. Below you find my results

works for me
CustomContent
HitCounter
XStandard
Template Externalizer
Last Modified Pages

some errors in code (impossible to adjust without programmer knowledge)
Frontend Users
Self Registration
Bookmarks
PiFAQ – the code it terrible (pain!), not templates, database tables and columns are named in German.

just didn’t work
Linkmanager
pi_lastmodified
PiSearch

It’s not a complaint. It is something about QA. I think if module is marked as stable it has to run without any errors otherwise it is not stable. Probably the module runs but a certain release is required for it. In this case I would like to see in the forge section for which releases the module has been approved to avoid try and error. It will be nice to group modules not only by development status but by release.

I have written my own modules for all tried and not working or flawed above because I am afraid of quality. A lot of modules have not been updated since years. So using the modules I cannot simply upgrade CMS. If modules are not compatible I have to wait for upgrades for the module (without guarantee it would ever happen) unless I am a programmer and can adjust the code myself.

I like the CMSMS core. It is perfect for me and my needs. And I would appreciate to see just three stable modules which are really stable instead of 20 marked as stable and flawed in fact. Are there intentions to implement QA for external modules or the community can carry on using them at own risk?

Sonya

Yes, I needed to rewrite almost half of Linkmanager module in order to work properly. And some of modules I prefered to write myself when I tried the standart ones. For example News module: there is a patch regarding pagination, but nobody amends News module so there would be pagination in standart module. php_bbx tag is not working at all. But it is still there. And some of tags/modules are too old to work in newest versions of CMS MS core.

Yes, I'd also like to be able to link to a website where a module is working, so I can see what it does before downloading. Anyone know if this can be done? It would help decide which modules were working well and suitable.

Cheers,
Contented 

contented wrote: It would help decide which modules were working well and suitable.

Actually a good idea. But... due to the extremely vulnerability of the whole server (if anyone can log as admin to prove modules) nobody will do it.

Hi Sonya,

Sonya wrote: I tried some of them mostly marked as Production/Stable by Development Status.

The problem you told about comes from another side. 

PiFAQ – the code it terrible (pain!), not templates, database tables and columns are named in German.

This module is out of support cause author has leaved CMSms. AND: It was released for CMSms version 0.10 (!) - means June 2005. Since this time CMSms has made some big steps forward. In the following some modules wount work furthermore (in cause of so many source changes).

just didn’t work

You are invited to post bug reports.

pi_lastmodified

Same as pifaq ...

PiSearch

Cant validate this. Module or tag?

I have to wait for upgrades for the module (without guarantee it would ever happen) unless I am a programmer and can adjust the code myself.

So you are invited too to post a patch on project pages so it will work 

Are there intentions to implement QA for external modules

The problem of that is available (wo)man power. Maybe you've seen that a QA team exists (leaders are westis and patricia).

http://dev.cmsmadesimple.org/projects/qateam/

But on my support I'm daily on forum and I've read nothing from this users last time (unfortunately) - it's hard to say, but means for me - QA team does not exist.

You are invited once again to revitalize this project.

As I said last time - CMSms needs your help, community !!!

cyberman wrote:

PiFAQ – the code it terrible (pain!), not templates, database tables and columns are named in German.

This module is out of support cause author has leaved CMSms. AND: It was released for CMSms version 0.10 (!) - means June 2005.

That is exactly the problem. You tell the author leaved and the module was developed for version 0.10. How and where can I get this kind of information myself? I just look into modules and see that there is a stable module for manage FAQ's. I load it and have pain

cyberman wrote:

just didn’t work

You are invited to post bug reports.

I do not really believe that posting bugs for modules which have not been developed since June 2005 is reasonable. Let the dead died and do not disturb them, but mark them as dead  The list above is only an example, if I would post my questions and bug reports for each of them I will be defenitely banned in this forum within a couple of hours When I look in the source code and realize 95% have to be rewritten, I do not bother with bug reports and support requests but start writing my own modules.

cyberman wrote: You are invited once again to revitalize this project.

I keep your invitation in mind, probably in some months. At the moment my time is limited and all I can is writing long comments in such discussions 

Sonya wrote: How and where can I get this kind of information myself?

You are disguised on foto but I think you have a very nice and intelligent brain  so you can make a look at the release date. And if you add one and one you will know "Oh, it was written for an older version".

there is a stable module for manage FAQ's.

Have you tried questions module?

but start writing my own modules.

Another thing - on my support I've read often "I'm trying to write a module" but I cant see nothing on forge  . Open source means to share your skills. Knowledge is the only thing which is double if you share it.

At the moment my time is limited

My time too ...

all I can is writing long comments in such discussions

Yes. You said it. It's nothing against you but this is one of the main problem of CMSms - users are coming to forum and and saying "Oh, what a nice CMS. Can we have this module? And can we have that feature?"

But nobody is ready to help continously. Everyone, who knows, what CMSms can do for him/her, should ask themselve: "And what can I do for CMSms?". With much talking about the work isn't done  ...

exactly, we all contribute our tine, and volunteer the work we do for the public good.  If we're getting paid for a module we endeavor to provide the complete the module, and to ensure that it is of the upmost quality, and that it works satisfactorily for the customer.  then we usually share the module with others.

Another point.  There is no such thing as 'a bug free product'.  Some people will use the product in ways it is not designed to work, or in environments which it hasn't been tested with, or (as happens much of the time), not know how to use the product anyways. 

I've briefly tested the SelfRegistration module, and the FrontEndUsers modules (svn versions) just after reading this post and didn't see any problems.  Saying that there  are 'Some Errors In Code' doesn't help anybody and just fosters false illusions about a product.  If you have something bad to say about a module or a product, please provide descriptions.

Also, the words Production/Stable also mean different things to different people.  For me it means either that the customer is satisfied with the product, and/or I didn't have any problems with it.  Or it could also mean that I don't have the time or inclination to properly maintain all of the forge settings for the 20 or so modules that I work with.  It could also mean, that it was 'Stable when I released it', and haven't worked with the module for quite some time, though it may no longer be compatible with the current version of CMS.

If this were a paid product (including all of the modules), we would have the time and resources (we could hire peopole) to keep the databases up to date, to ensure that the various modules worked with the various versions of CMSMS, cross reference everything so we knew which version of what module worked with which version of CMSMS, unfortunately, we don't.

As well, Myself and others are attempting to build a business around CMSMS (much like many of the website developers and designers have done), and this is starting to gather steam.  As a result, i can no longer just 'give away the farm' with new modules.  I can't work on free stuff when I should be spending my time getting customers to pay for development.   

I hope this provides a bit more information for you.

Hey, cyberman and calguy100,

I am here because I like this CMS. More I love it The core is ideally for both developers and people without any programmer knowledge. By the way, there are two sites besides my own projects running CMSMS according to my recommendation and installation help  And they love it too.The aim of my topic was not to make the product bad, sorry if it sounds so. The aim was just to suggest some improvements.

And... I had a wrong idea of this community. I've seen development team presented itself (a little crowd and thought I would discover something that has been overlooked by QA-team   You are both right. Definitely. And before I write down here all my reasons for not doing something and just talking... Great work!

PS: -> calguy100 - one problem with registration module was described and solved by me here http://forum.cmsmadesimple.org/index.ph ... 355.0.html It's not a great issue, I know, but just not to be all talker

Yeah, I think I already fixed that in SVN.

calguy1000 wrote: There is no such thing as 'a bug free product'.

Yep, not at Open Source software and not at commercial one - I say only monthly patch day  .

or in environments which it hasn't been tested with

On my support I see there are so many enviroments outthere so I have to say it's not possible to test all.

Sonya wrote: The aim of my topic was not to make the product bad

Oh no Sonyushka,  as I said my posting was nothing against you.

I've wrote only what I'm thinking and I thought sometimes it must be written down  .

cyberman wrote: Oh no Sonyushka,  as I said my posting was nothing against you.

Nevertheless, from this point I take it very personally 

It would be nice to see the Forge either cleaned out (old, out of date modules & tags just deleted) or reorganized. For example, maybe we could have an alternate hierarchy by CMSMS release in addition to the existing scheme (by type of functionality provided).

As an on again, off again CMSMS contributor, my biggest issue is time. Paying clients take priority over any time I devote to this project. Generally, I contribute most when one of my clients needs something that isn't working (or doesn't work how I want it to). Once that's done, I get wrapped up in other things and don't even check in on the forums or forge.

Still, if modules were organized by CMSMS version, this would be a bit more clear to users. We developers would test our modules with each new core release and then add our modules to the new branch or not.

Tim

skypanther wrote: It would be nice to see the Forge either cleaned out

Good idea but make currently not sense as Ted said some days ago he is writing his own forge solution on Ruby (if I'm right)

Still, if modules were organized by CMSMS version, this would be a bit more clear to users.

Yep. My meaning ...

We developers would test our modules with each new core release and then add our modules to the new branch or not.

If every dev would do it so it would be a new age for CMSms . But sometimes I see there's a module released and next half year happens nothing. But in a half year the development goes further ...