Limit explore view visibility #575

Open
opened 4 months ago by fnetX · 4 comments
fnetX commented 4 months ago
Collaborator

There was a Codeberg e.V. members only discussion about making projects (in-)visible based on some heuristics, started about a year ago.

Currently, Codeberg is becoming more active, but many projects in the explore view are just a lot of noise and don't show off what awesome stuff is going on at Codeberg.

My proposal would be the following - hide projects from explore:

  • that do not have either a description, a custom icon or topics
  • that are forks
  • that have some flag that indicates some oddness, e.g. a missing licence, unwanted content etc

Update from Discussion: When the default sort is used and when there is no search input, otherwise show all.

Some repos have no description but a fancy README, often they have at least topics or an icon. From a quick glance, I didn't find any "interesting" (to me) repo among those who had nothing out of the three.

Further, maybe we can highlight repos with many stars or forks somehow, maybe by making the stars yellow, slightly changing the background-color or adding a red "Hot" (or, eh, whatever) label :)

There was a Codeberg e.V. members only discussion about making projects (in-)visible based on some heuristics, started about a year ago. Currently, Codeberg is becoming more active, but many projects in the explore view are just a lot of noise and don't show off what awesome stuff is going on at Codeberg. My proposal would be the following - hide projects from explore: - that do not have either a description, a custom icon or topics - that are forks - that have some flag that indicates some oddness, e.g. a missing licence, unwanted content etc Update from Discussion: When the default sort is used and when there is no search input, otherwise show all. Some repos have no description but a fancy README, often they have at least topics or an icon. From a quick glance, I didn't find any "interesting" (to me) repo among those who had nothing out of the three. Further, maybe we can highlight repos with many stars or forks somehow, maybe by making the stars yellow, slightly changing the background-color or adding a red "Hot" (or, eh, whatever) label :)
fnetX added the
enhancement
codeberg
labels 4 months ago

Example: I use the search term "dotfiles" as it's become the sort of de-facto standard name for a repository where people store their customized configs; your proposal would hide those repos from me because the user doesn't have a description or icon - because Gitea has no other way to search across the server, I lose functionality. As it is, I cannot look for example files in repositories with a simple search.

Add filters to enhance the Explore experience by allowing users to choose (checkboxes) "Show only: [x] Topics [x] Descriptions [x] Icons [x] Forks" then we don't penalize people who look for repo names. If Codeberg/Gitea had another form of search for finding content this might make sense to exclude things from Explore, but right now it's all we have to use for searching.

Example: I use the search term "dotfiles" as it's become the sort of de-facto standard name for a repository where people store their customized configs; your proposal would hide those repos from me because the user doesn't have a description or icon - because Gitea has no other way to search across the server, I lose functionality. As it is, I cannot look for example files in repositories with a simple search. Add filters to enhance the Explore experience by allowing users to choose (checkboxes) "Show only: [x] Topics [x] Descriptions [x] Icons [x] Forks" then we don't penalize people who look for repo names. If Codeberg/Gitea had another form of search for finding content this might make sense to exclude things from Explore, but right now it's all we have to use for searching.
Poster
Collaborator

Sorry for not elaborating. I'd ideally add a way to still show all repositories via a click, or limit it to the default sorting. Excluding on search is of course possible, too.

We'd need this anyway, so that admins and moderators can find content - it would be too easy if you could hide abuse by just leaving this fields empty.

In any case, I would mainly focus on the default view, so people get an impression of what's going on at Codeberg. This is probably how people determine if it's worth moving into a community or not. If they have to click a lot of filters until they find an interesting match, they'll probably stay where they are.

For example, I'd try to be inspired by 8d2061b748 which already hides users from the default view when they have no repos - because otherwise it'd be filled with spam.

Sorry for not elaborating. I'd ideally add a way to still show all repositories via a click, or limit it to the default sorting. Excluding on search is of course possible, too. We'd need this anyway, so that admins and moderators can find content - it would be too easy if you could hide abuse by just leaving this fields empty. In any case, I would mainly focus on the default view, so people get an impression of what's going on at Codeberg. This is probably how people determine if it's worth moving into a community or not. If they have to click a lot of filters until they find an interesting match, they'll probably stay where they are. For example, I'd try to be inspired by https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/gitea/commit/8d2061b748c71831f8e63577b65de64d71e96966 which already hides users from the default view when they have no repos - because otherwise it'd be filled with spam.
Collaborator

Possible implementation for codeberg: https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/19361/ (It will be modified to be more compatible and in-line for gitea itself).

Possible implementation for codeberg: https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/19361/ (It will be modified to be more compatible and in-line for gitea itself).
Poster
Collaborator

Thank you @Gusted, it's live. Let's collect some feedback :)

Thank you @Gusted, it's live. Let's collect some feedback :)
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Milestone
No Assignees
3 Participants
Notifications
Due Date

No due date set.

Dependencies

This issue currently doesn't have any dependencies.

Loading…
There is no content yet.