Plugins traffic

More information about the plugin developer

 
Picture of Jérôme Mouneyrac
More information about the plugin developer
Group Core developersGroup Documentation writersGroup Particularly helpful MoodlersGroup Plugin developers

Hi,

when browsing for Moodle plugins on Moodle.org, sometimes there are information I would like to know. On the other side, as a plugin developer they're also information I would like to emphasis to plugin users. I thought I would mention these information here in case it gives some ideas for improving the Moodle.org repository (which has been well improved these last years).

* who is the main maintainer (at the moment, I am marked as "Lead maintainer" as soon as I create a plugin. It makes people think I am the main maintainer. Sometimes there are just no real maintainer available, or sometimes it is an organisation/company behind the plugin and so no physical person is currently allocated to maintain it.)

* who is the current main maintainer (original author, been maintaining the plugin for 3 years...) 

* was the author commissioned for the plugin

* is the main maintainer paid to fix the plugin (employee from university? employee from moodle partner?)

* is the plugin created by a freelancer

* is the plugin created by a university/school/teachers

* is the plugin created by a Moodle Partner

* is the plugin created by another company/organisation

* is the plugin own by a person (author, main maintainer) or by a company/orgnisation (and in this case, the main maintainer is just a person who, possibly, has less freedom on decision make about the plugin)

* what is the Moodle experience of the creator 

* what is the Moodle experience of the main maintainer

* does the main maintainer use the plugin in an important business product? (i.e. I would like to know how important is the plugin for the maintainer - the risk of issues is a lot lower if the main maintainer is using the plugin in prod, and even less likely if it is a critical business plugin)

* what Moodle version is using the maintainer (i.e. if I don't use the same version, the risk of not getting fixes is higher)

* does the maintainer engage himself to quickly fix bugs as they arise (I don't know who would say yes or no, but at least it would make the maintainer maintenance plan a bit more transparent. There is nothing wrong, in my opinion, for people saying they are not willing to, or just can not promise to fix bug as quickly as they would like. From Moodle partners who need to run business to the teacher developing the plugin on his own time, they are all right for different reasons to not be willing to fix issues on demand. The same if they do want to let people know they plan to be reactive and highly consider their plugin, they should be able to let people know that they engage themself personally even thought, Moodle.org should still mention that legally they should still be free to fix or not. It is just to understand the maintainer mindset toward his maintenance. I think it should be a mandatory field if it existed.)

* does the maintainer engage himself to really quickly fix security and blocker bugs

* is the maintainer (freelancer, teachers, company) accepting contract offer. If yes where does he/it lives so I can know what kind of rate to expect (I understand it can be find somewhere, but it is actually a info that should be brought to the plugin user attention, so with other data, the plugin user has a better picture of the plugin health and he can do a better risk analysis).

* how dangerous is a low score plugin health (for example an auth plugin which is critical and need to be seriously considered by the plugin user, versus something less critical)

* stats like how often the plugin is updated on github/bitbucket, or the frequency of version. 

I understand some of them can already be found (after clicking and comparing data around Moodle.org, Github and other pages) but it would be great if such info were clearly display into a "plugin health table" and also searchable.

Cheers,

Jerome

 
Average of ratings: -