Add function implemented

[m^(2)]

Also, I have a question:
How do you deal with user rank changes?
If a R1 user adds an entry to favourities, some time later moves to R2, will the entry get another point?

[ashghost]

@ m^2: N/A means "not applicable", which is the same as "irrelevant" (though it has also been used to mean "not available").

@todaysicon: The votes may reflect the type of people who are more likely to vote, but I wouldn't expect that to influence rankings too much. The number of clicks on the TPFC website and download links are a bigger problem. For instance, there are some apps that I've been much, much more likely to re-download through the TPFC page - have I essentially voted for these apps far more times than others? Apps with shorter release cycles are also highly favored by this. Also, anytime someone puts a website or download link in the forum for an app that was already in the database, it potentially reduces that app's score. Those things are far less random/even than the differences in the opinions of people who vote versus those who don't.

[Lupo73]

Very powerful implementation. Thanks Andrew ;)

I need some more time to study it, anyway this is my first opinion: the idea is simply genial, I'll try to help you to refine this new system.
First of all, you could create a page that explain these new website features and help users to understand and correctly use them (or improve it in the FAQ).
Secondly, you could consider to add a page to list new submitted software, for example as an additional link "Order by: Most recent - Most Popular - Under Approval" (or "Under Ratification", I don't know what is the best English acceptation). It could help users to see a preview of new software and vote them.
Another idea (but this is a proposal that want to ask your opinions about it) could be to make the Popularity score counter easier to understand, replacing it with a stars-system, but keeping the actual system to vote and eventually a pop-up (or a link to) a more accurate report, with total score and eventually extra score info. It is only an idea that want to stir the argument.

[quote="ashghost"]Also, anytime someone puts a website or download link in the forum for an app that was already in the database, it potentially reduces that app's score.[/quote]
What does it mean? Is there a mechanism that reduces app score if a link to that app is posted?

[Napiophelios]

[quote="Lupo73"]
What does it mean? Is there a mechanism that reduces app score if a link to that app is posted?[/quote]

I think the DataBase dl links count the number of hits for the popularity score..maybe

[ashghost]

@Lupo73: Sorry that was confusing, Napiophelios explained it correctly - a link in the forums would reduce the number of times people used the links on the actual TPFC entry.

@Andrew, I agree with Lupo73 that there ought to be a way to see only the private submissions.

For one thing, the only way to tell if an app is private when you use the "[@]" search is by looking at that second popularity number. More importantly, if this gets moving and there are tens of new "private" apps in a week plus dozens of updates of public apps, some of the new "private" apps might be on the 6th or 7th page! This, however, is another thing that would be ameliorated by allowing visitors to choose to see 5, 10, 25 or 50 apps (for example) on one page.

I disagree with Lupo73 about a simpler popularity score system. I like the simple numerical scale, I just think that the use of click-through tallies favors some apps.

When an app gets enough votes to be public, will it debut at the top of the "latest" page?

I'm glad it went live. I'll have to find some forum submissions to add (I'll start with my own submissions, but I think I might have to dig back to 2008 :-O

[Andrew Lee]

@Checker: I have implemented the change to reset "What's new" (aka Checker) field if version number is changed, and "What's new" is not.

The main page shows my username and rank, but the "Add Entry" link just takes me back to the main page EDIT: it doesn't just refresh the
current page, but redirects to http://www.portablefreeware.com/index.php

Does anyone else experience this? I checked on both my machine (development) and the live system, but couldn't reproduce the problem. If you can't add entries, it should show you an access denied message instead of taking you back to index.php.

Only my favorites are showing up when I search for [ashghost"], so does the list only include apps added with the new "add entry" function, or should it include the existing "suggested by" apps?

Currently, only the apps that you add via "Rocks" button will display in the "[ashghost"]" list. But I can fix that.... Done! All apps with "Suggested by" fields that can be matched up with a phpbb username has been added to the favorites list for that user. Thanks for the idea!

Searching for anything in brackets other than my own username (I tried [andrew lee], [checker], [alephx], and even [dfsjlkfjdssdsd]) returns the entire database. As I understand it, only [@] should do that (and without any "unapproved" submissions because no one's added an entry yet)

The username search is now case-insensitive. If the username is not found, nothing is returned instead of return all the public entries.

I wonder what this will mean for .NET apps: would you prefer that we don't vote for them if they're submitted? My guess is that you would, but that you'll favor your new democracy even more.

What do you guys think? Is it safe to let the current system decide? If enough people vote for a .NET app, maybe we should let it through.

It would be nice to be able to vote for multiple apps at once so that I could more quickly fill up my favorites list (I'm on high-latency satellite internet now - 1.5 Mbps, but each page request takes seconds). EDIT: I can understand why it works this way, and it really doesn't take that long as long as I use plenty of tabs.

This one goes into my todo list. Thanks!

It would be great to be able to choose to view more than 5 per page for the
same reason. Have you maintained that limit because of existing database/software limitations, the amount of work involved, to reduce bandwidth demands, or just a lack of interest?

I guess mainly no one has brought this up before. It's 5 because I like short pages instead of long ones, and 5 is a good length for me. But I guess other's preferences might be different. I will try to work this one in as an option. Added to todo.

When you confirm your vote, the page says "Thanks for rating <LinkToApplicationPage>!".
Those links are generated incorrectly. They should look like http://www.portablefreeware.com/index.php?id=1529
but they actually look like http://www.portablefreeware.com/rate.php?id=1529

Fixed!

can you link these features to the forum more? like show someones rank beside their username on the forum, even when someone is viewing the forum and not logged in?

That... would be tough. It would touch phpBB3's code, which I would prefer not to because it makes upgrading phpBB3 messier.

and, can you make a link out of the forum usernames, so that when you click on it, it will take you to the 'www.portablefreeware.com/index.php?q=[<USERNAME>]&m=Search' page?

Definitely. Goes into my todo, and I will think about how best to implement it.

can you add a tag to the main page to show only updated or newly added (public view) apps? because sometimes seeing all the updates is nice, but at times i just want to see what new apps have been added lately that i might have missed because of the daily Pages of updates, and since this voting system will probably increase the number of newly added apps, itd be nice to be able to view them without the updates in the way, and vice versa for the people that might want to see the updates without all the new apps

OK, this one goes into my todo too.

OK, that's all I can manage for now. I will work through the other messages later.

[joby_toss]

I wonder what this will mean for .NET apps: would you prefer that we don't vote for them if they're submitted? My guess is that you would, but that you'll favor your new democracy even more.

What do you guys think? Is it safe to let the current system decide? If enough people vote for a .NET app, maybe we should let it through.

I, for one, have nothing against .net apps (but I'm sad to see that the increasing number of those apps is regarded as an "evolution") as long as the submitter tests them thoroughly before (for portability - other than the need of .net installation) and states the exact minimum .net version required. I'd like this new field to appear in red color .

[m^(2)]

@ m^2: N/A means "not applicable", which is the same as "irrelevant" (though it has also been used to mean "not available").

Or "no answer".

I wonder what this will mean for .NET apps: would you prefer that we don't vote for them if they're submitted? My guess is that you would, but that you'll favor your new democracy even more.

What do you guys think? Is it safe to let the current system decide? If enough people vote for a .NET app, maybe we should let it through.

Though I really don't like .NET, I think that if people want it - they should get it.
But it should be listed in the popular dependencies, so people remember that it's not something everybody has.

Hmm...something is broken. The last 2 posts don't display quotes as quotes but as regular text.

[Andrew Lee]

i take it that once you add a program to the database you can link to it directly for like the purpose of posting to the forum?
like in the 'Portable Freeware Submission' section, which should probably be kept just so people can 'get the word' out about their submitted apps?

Sure. I don't see any problem with that.

How does a private entry get seen? Is it by forum entry?(Do they get automatically entered into a forum?) By random searches of [@] or [username]?

Nope, they don't get automatically entered into the forum. A private entry is not meant to be seen by the general public. It's meant to be seen by the few members (73 so far, rank >= 1) who are actively looking for new entries and evaluating them to see if they are really portable and deserves to be made "public".

Are you counting no votes? (Would a vote against and a vote for cancel out their part of the rating?)

There are no "no" votes.

I would like to ask if the voting includes rejection from the main database as well? (I would not recommenced this)

No. I am actually thinking about how to improve the "reject" system (or remove altogether) now that the rules have changed. Any thoughts are welcomed.

Will private entries show up on database searches?

No. Unless the user includes the [@].

Would the All page include private entries?

No.

Would it be possible to have 2 private entries for one application, or would the application name be searched for before it could be saved?

No. I have added a reminder in the "Add entry" page to search for the app name using "[@] appname" before submission, but it's entirely up to the member. However, I am counting on community effort to made only one entry "public" if there are duplicates.

Lupo should be pleased; he'll finally have a chance to get some of his apps on the site.

I believe Lupo's fabulous DropIt app is the first to become "public" under the new system. Congrats!

edit: is the bbcode disabled in this subforum?

For those of you having problems with bbcode not displaying, please make sure you do not have "Disable BBCode" checked for some reason (eg. in your profile, or during message editing).

Path portability should allow 1 more option: Irrelevant.

The "N/A" option is meant for that. The idea is that if it is irrelevant, it shouldn't be displayed. If from the nature of the app, it should be relevent, it will eventually be populated with some meaningful value.

Size should be optional IMO. I don't think that it's really important nowadays. Especially that it's such a poor indicator of what to expect. Cluster size varies. And for some users, possible further optimizations can be a great win...and sometimes give nothing. And something that always annoyed me - file that comes upxed out of the box is considered "uncompressed" here...

The size is meant to be an approximate, not precise figure. Most users won't bother to optimize further from out-of-the-box, so an approximate figure is still useful.

Such path is relative to the working directory (unless a program uses counter-standard nomenclature). In great majority of cases, if application uses such path, it's a bug.

I don't understand. "..\..\personal\work.doc" is standard and accepted by Win32 API (it's relative to GetCurrentDirectory(), which is usually the EXE path unless it's changed using SetCurrentDirectory()).

For example, under PStart, I have:

Code: Select all

\apps
  \pstart
    pstart.exe
  \photofiltre
    photofiltre.exe

So I can reference PhotoFiltre as "..\photofiltre\photofiltre.exe" under PStart without any issues.

How do you deal with user rank changes?
If a R1 user adds an entry to favourities, some time later moves to R2, will the entry get another point?

It's dynamic. Say said member is R1 now. If he becomes R2 in future, all his favorite apps will automatically get the additional 1 point.

The number of clicks on the TPFC website and download links are a bigger problem. For instance, there are some apps that I've been much, much more likely to re-download through the TPFC page - have I essentially voted for these apps far more times than others? Apps with shorter release cycles are also highly favored by this. Also, anytime someone puts a website or download link in the forum for an app that was already in the database, it potentially reduces that app's score. Those things are far less random/even than the differences in the opinions of people who vote versus those who don't.

The votes are IP referenced, so double-couting is reduced, though not totally eliminated because said votes are purged periodically to make space for new ones. However, because this is opened to the general public (and result in a LOT of data), I think all this noise should be drowned/smoothed out in the vast sea of data.

I am opened to discussion on this. It's trivial for me to disable scoring for launch + download, but first we have to be convinced that it will improve on the current situation. For me, scoring launch + download measures passive activity (because I believe most passerbys won't bother to vote), which is less prone to tampering than active voting alone. Also, forum traffic is vastly lower than public traffic to the main pages (easily 1:100), so we don't want to over-estimate the impact of links on forum posts.

First of all, you could create a page that explain these new website features and help users to understand and correctly use them (or improve it in the FAQ).
Secondly, you could consider to add a page to list new submitted software, for example as an additional link "Order by: Most recent - Most Popular - Under Approval" (or "Under Ratification", I don't know what is the best English acceptation). It could help users to see a preview of new software and vote them.

We will definitely improve on the documentation in due course. The reason why I don't want to add any links to the private apps is because once those apps are accessible via a public link, you can be sure the spammers will be there (see what happens to the forum and comments section). Since the members who matter in the scoring process are already active participants, it's better to maintain access to private entries via commands in the search box.

For one thing, the only way to tell if an app is private when you use the "[@]" search is by looking at that second popularity number.

I would also like to add that the 2nd popularity number is only displayed if you are logged in. A passerby will not see this number.

[Lupo73]

"... once those apps are accessible via a public link, you can be sure the spammers will be there"

If a page is accessible only by registered users, can it be afflicted by spam? Because otherwise you could consider to create this additional section available only for registered users (something like the Add Entry, but for all users). It could be reported in the FAQ and motivate users to make the registration.

[m^(2)]

Path portability should allow 1 more option: Irrelevant.

The "N/A" option is meant for that. The idea is that if it is irrelevant, it shouldn't be displayed. If from the nature of the app, it should be relevent, it will eventually be populated with some meaningful value.

If N/A means "not applicable", how to express "I don't know, I didn't test it"?

Such path is relative to the working directory (unless a program uses counter-standard nomenclature). In great majority of cases, if application uses such path, it's a bug.

I don't understand. "..\..\personal\work.doc" is standard and accepted by Win32 API (it's relative to GetCurrentDirectory(), which is usually the EXE path unless it's changed using SetCurrentDirectory()).

For example, under PStart, I have:

Code: Select all

\apps
  \pstart
    pstart.exe
  \photofiltre
    photofiltre.exe

So I can reference PhotoFiltre as "..\photofiltre\photofiltre.exe" under PStart without any issues.

There are many cases when on the start, Current Dir=Exe Dir (especially 2clicking in Explorer), but there are many when it's not. Examples:
-some shortcuts don't set starting directory. Or set it to another dir.
-most batches don't bother with it. Then the cd that a batch received at the start is carried to all tools started by it. It's not uncommon to call programs (or other batches) placed in different directories.
-many tools let you to set cd of the programs they start differently (I'm thinking about Total Commander here, but I would be surprised if other good file managers and menus lacked this option)
-programs can be executed manually from another directory. It's common with tools that you have in %PATH%, but possible (and useful) with other ones too.

In general, if application assumes to have cd=exe dir, it's a bug. (*)


(*) Well, unless application is not supposed to be used separately, but only with some other thing that ensures the equation holds. But such apps don't have own entries anyway.

ADDED:
Strange. My previous post shows quotes correctly now, but this one doesn't.

[donald]

Andrew if dot Net and Java are accepted would it be possible to perform a search that ignored them?

Would it be possible to look for just Java, and .Net?

I would like to be able to distinguish such dependent applications (non-portable library). (Yes I know PortableApps.com has Java.)

Filtering would be great for .Net, Java dependencies.

I would like to be able to choose to not see .Net, and Java at all (by not displaying them), or be able to perform a search that would not include them.

******************
On Java, and .Net I use a few dependent applications, though other than OpenOffice.org (self-contained) none that are highly used.

I prefer my collection of apps to be self-contained, some of the Library (.Net, Java) dependent apps require specific versions to run (not many in my experience yet).

I believe that eventually .Net could be the rug Microsoft might try to pull out from under the Developers, and users (at least that is what some Linux users/developers suggest when they say Just say no to .Net).
Edit**************
Oh and thanks for the great website Andrew.

[Andrew Lee]

If a page is accessible only by registered users, can it be afflicted by spam? Because otherwise you could consider to create this additional section available only for registered users (something like the Add Entry, but for all users). It could be reported in the FAQ and motivate users to make the registration.

OK, then it shouldn't be a problem.

Strange. My previous post shows quotes correctly now, but this one doesn't.

Click "User Control Panel" at the top-right, under "Board Preferences, Edit posting defaults", make sure "Enable BBCode by default" is set to "Yes".

Andrew if dot Net and Java are accepted would it be possible to perform a search that ignored them? Would it be possible to look for just Java, and .Net?

It should be possible. I am planning for an advanced search options page that lets you set various options, so this could be included.

[Andrew Lee]

The section header how says "Username's favorites" when you search using "[Username]".

The private score of an app can now be clicked through to show a list of users who have added that app to their favorites list. Each username can also be clicked through to display their favorites.

[joby_toss]

Why does my name appear twice in QZoom's rating? I might have rated it twice (I can't remember) but shouldn't be a way to prevent this behavior?
http://www.portablefreeware.com/scorelist.php?id=1523