Things that do not currently work

tekojo

Hi all,

I've been looking at the site some more and a few things that make me wonder on the logic.

Tags - they seem to be completely misused. Everything is tagged to death, so that tags are in effect useless.
Groups and forums - these seem really similar and overlap a lot. In my mind they separation needs to be clearer.
The wiki...

If you have any pet peeves about the site, please post them below.

sierdzio

[quote author="Tero Kojo" date="1393842666"]* Tags - they seem to be completely misused. Everything is tagged to death, so that tags are in effect useless.

Groups and forums - these seem really similar and overlap a lot. In my mind they separation needs to be clearer.[/quote]

Correct, tags seem superfluous. I do not know if they influence the search results in any way (probably not), and there is little use in them elsewhere (at least in my experience, other might differ).

Groups and forums: yes, Groups are right now just a different type of Forum + a pretty useless chat feature (useless because it does not send updates about responses to email). I like the idea of groups with their icons and stuff, but when it comes to functionality, there is little need for them.

JKSH

[quote author="Tero Kojo" date="1393842666"]

Tags - they seem to be completely misused. Everything is tagged to death, so that tags are in effect useless.[/quote]Agreed; I've never found tags useful.

The location of the "add tag" field is also dangerously close to the "search" field -- it's easy to get them mixed up. I've done that several times already :P

There was a detailed discussion about tags a few years ago that sums things up well: http://qt-project.org/forums/viewthread/12941

[quote]

Groups and forums - these seem really similar and overlap a lot. In my mind they separation needs to be clearer.
[/quote]There are many subforums already, including language-based subforums. What value can groups add?

sierdzio mentioned icons; we could let users identify their interests through something like Wikipedia's "Userboxes":https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Userboxes without an additional "group forum". IMHO, the function of grouping forum posts by interest is best done by choosing an appropriate subforum and adding (good quality) tags.

[quote]If you have any pet peeves about the site, please post them below. [/quote]I find the "Downloads page":http://qt-project.org/downloads to be very verbose yet unclear.

It's not clear that the Windows packages that lack "OpenGL" in their labels are ANGLE-based.
It's not clear that the Qt 4.8 packages don't include Qt Creator
For Qt 4.8, it's not clear that the .zip package is for Windows and the .tar.gz package is for Mac/Linux
It's not clear that the Qt Installer Framework and Qt Online Installer are completely different things
There are repetitions too: Repeated links to the archives, repeated links to the git repo, repeated license spiels

tekojo

Thanks,

I've gotten some feedback on the downloads page too, and have to agree that it needs some clarifying. (I'll put that on the todo-list, it requires a bit of time, as it needs to be edited in source for some weird reason)

I took a look at the tags discussion, also the spin off of the thread, which was ... interesting reading. My thinking is that the points from tagging should be removed, or some penalty set for the situation where someone else removes a tag you made.

sierdzio

Oh, another thing: I would vote for adding a link to the bugtracker on the main page (qt-project.org). Currently it's semi-hidden on the contribution. Also, the links to the mailing lists and IRC don't really belong on "Contributions":https://qt-project.org/contribute page, do they?

I have nothing much against them being here, apart from the fact that I often recommend people to ask their question on the ML or IRC, and I need to specifically provide the link, otherwise users find it hard to locate.