Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

Welcome to Codidact Meta!

Codidact Meta is the meta-discussion site for the Codidact community network and the Codidact software. Whether you have bug reports or feature requests, support questions or rule discussions that touch the whole network – this is the site for you.

Codidact Collab - should it be listed?

+6
−0

The drop down menu at the top right of each Codidact page shows a list of all the sites in the network. The list is also shown in the page footer, and on codidact.com.

There is also a site for people who work on the QPixel software that Codidact runs on, called Codidact Collab. However, this one is not included in the list of Codidact sites. Is this an intentional omission or would it be useful to include it, so that interested people can be more aware that there is support for contributing to QPixel?

I understand that not all Codidact users will be interested in this particular site, but the same is true of all the Codidact sites - very few people will be interested in everything on the list.

What are the reasons for and against including Collab in the list?


Presumably Collab would automatically become included if it were hosted on the same domain as the other communities, as suggested in Is there an argument for having Collab under codidact.com?

History
Why does this post require moderator attention?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

0 comment threads

4 answers

You are accessing this answer with a direct link, so it's being shown above all other answers regardless of its score. You can return to the normal view.

+1
−0

That's a good question. We kept it separate because we didn't want to distract people from their primary focus, which we assumed would be on the communities here rather than the underpinnings. Collab is linked from the GitHub repository and we expected that to be the primary path in.

I don't have a strong opinion; it seemed like a good idea at the time, and I don't know of a reason we couldn't change it (though I don't know everything :-) ). We could also leave it the way it is and link it more prominently here, perhaps in the same part of the right column (on desktops) where we have the links for ads and donations.

History
Why does this post require moderator attention?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

1 comment thread

It's also a community, isn't it? (2 comments)
+4
−0

Personally, I am not currently looking to learn Ruby and contribute to QPixel, but I am interested in occasionally browsing Codidact Collab to see what's happening.

I only discovered it through a link I happened to stumble upon, and was completely unaware of it before that. If it was included in the list of sites I would have started browsing it much sooner.

If there isn't any harm in including it in the list, I wonder if more people browsing it might eventually lead to more people becoming contributors, even if they were initially only browsing out of interest. (Update: as anecdotal evidence, after a period of just browsing I have ended up making contributions...)

If browsing leads to trying out setting up the software locally, and that leads to questions about how to do so and common obstacles, then that provides more info for future contributors, even if the person asking the question is only setting it up out of curiosity (and doesn't become a contributor themselves).

I'd like to see Collab included in the list for this reason. It also wouldn't hurt that it would then be easier for me to get to the site from Codidact when I feel like browsing...

Consistency

Also, from a consistency perspective, I can use the Communities drop down list to get here (Codidact Meta) from Collab, so it seems strange that the same method can't take me back to Collab afterwards.

History
Why does this post require moderator attention?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

0 comment threads

+2
−0

Another mention of Codidact Collab

While the user is taking the tour, in the last steps Codidactyl shows a list of all communities, in which Codidact Collab is included (marked in a red rectangle for the sake of this post):

Screenshot


My reply to Monica Cellio's answer

If the way it is intended to be found is through Github, then is there is a reason to show in the tour?


Personal opinion

I'd say there's no harm in keeping it. I agree with this comment.

History
Why does this post require moderator attention?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

0 comment threads

+2
−0

For people looking for a route from here to there

For now, while Codidact Collab is not in the drop down list of sites, I've realised that Collab is included in the dashboard, which is available from the button at the top right of the page, between the help button and the notifications button, which looks like a 3 by 3 grid of squares.

The dashboard button in context

The dashboard page shows which Categories of which sites have new content, including Collab.

History
Why does this post require moderator attention?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

0 comment threads

Sign up to answer this question »