| |
Perff
Administrator
Posts: 1674 |
CSDb V2
As some of you might have seen, there have been talked a bit about a CSDb V2.
I have also had this idea for some years now, because of some basic flaws in the originally database design of CSDb.
Now is the time to try to do something about it.
But we, the current CSDb staff, don't have the resources to do this, so we need your help!
Here is what we need:
1. Somewhere to host CSDb V2. The current hosting for CSDb is not very good, as some of you might agree on, and it would be very difficult for more people to develop on it, so a new hosting place is needed.
The requirements for such place are not to much. Talking about performance, CSDb can run on any normal computer today with no problem, and a few gig of disk space should be ok. The daily trafic sums up to about 40-50.000 hits and 300-400mb.
Some kind of CVS or similar to make it easy for multiple people to develop on it, is also required. (PS. We got no money! )
2. People that would help. First of all we need some willing developers - PHP & SQL. I don't think we should get too many - 2-3, perhaps 4 (plus myself :) ) We'll figure that out.
Also some design people, to make the site look kewl. :) And finally some people with deep knowledge of the scene so we are sure to get around every corner in the design phase.
3. Time and patience. :)
The plan is then to put togehter a CSDb V2 team (not to big, 6-8 people tops), and figure out exatcly how to make it. Of course we should look at the current CSDb, but I sugest we make everything from scratch.
Most importaint is the design phase. We must try to take all into account when designing it. I think this is the most importaint part of it all.
Then it gets coded, designed etc, and when it is ready for release, we transfer all the data from CSDb to CSDb V2. :)
Even though the CSDb team is the ones who should make it, it dosn't mean that the rest of you have nothing to say. Perhaps we could post our plans somewhere for all of you to comment on.
That is roughly how I see it.
Now lets have a nice little discussion. :) |
|
... 91 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....
|
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11349 |
I have tried to help, but it was all dismissed. It seems you are already three steps further than you should be at this point.
As soon as a database schema is posted for review i (and i am sure some others) will look at it, no problem. I wouldnt write a single line of code before this happened and went through a few iterations.
And then we can try to find a team of people who work out what tech to use. As others already said, i'd go for a very conservative yet stable and well known sql database. Because this is what people know and can handle easily. |
| |
instant
Registered: Mar 2020
Posts: 20 |
This thread is 16yrs old. A thousand things could have been tried by now. I think I'm moving at just the right speed.
I'm still working out some of the data aspects. It will be simple and easily extendable. I think people will like it.
The UI/UX stuff could be worked on independent of the data though. Who wants to help with that? We just need to define all use cases we can think of.
How do most people use the site?
When someone identifies incorrect data, what should be the process for making the correction?
When adding a new release, is there a proper order for entering the data?
etc... |
| |
Raistlin
Registered: Mar 2007
Posts: 657 |
I would say that you should just do it .. bearing in mind that if it was every to replace CSDb, it needs to of course take all CSDb's data - assuming that Perff is happy with that? And then add to that with all the tagging stuff that Groepaz has been asking for .. and more.
Graphically, I'd be careful .. try to make it look too good and you run the risk of it becoming less functional. The design right now is old school, yes - but it works. I know a lot of people who like it exactly how it is. Particularly at most of our ages, change isn't always welcomed ;-) |
| |
Burglar
Registered: Dec 2004
Posts: 1085 |
@instant: while you talked on irc to groepaz, count zero and myself about your plans, you immediately dismissed all our tips without argumentation (except some arguments of authority that have zero substance).
We see the exact same thing happening in this thread: you are dismissing every valid response from persons with tons of knowledge of csdb, software engineering, architecture and project management. And again, without argumentation.
This is off-putting and most likely the reason why people are not jumping aboard. At least for me it is. |
| |
Youth
Registered: Aug 2003
Posts: 43 |
Reading this thread it seems that this is not so much a technical problem, as developing a sense of shared ownership and vision. I think a tech-first approach very much risks people not being motivated to join because they don't feel like they are part of the fundamental decisions made about the future of CSDb.
How about collecting the issues and wishes for the current site, have people vote, comment and have a small team classify and prioritize what needs to be done. If you open a Github project or something similar, it's pretty easy. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11349 |
Indeed. The tech itself is irrelevant mostly - except that it should reflect what people know and can help with.
The important part is the database structure, and careful planning what goes where - so you don't end up with the same patching on patching on patching madness that csdb currently is. As said before, step one is designing the scheme and putting it up for review so people can tell what is bad about it and what needs to be added.
And even more important than the most important thing is that its driven by at least a few people from the currently active csdb community (i hate to use that word), ie the people who submit and maintain the data behind the scenes. Without those people, you'll end up with a pretty modern site which noone wants to use. |
| |
JackAsser
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 2014 |
Out of curiousity it would be nice to see the current DB scheme for CSDb v1. |
| |
instant
Registered: Mar 2020
Posts: 20 |
Quote: @instant: while you talked on irc to groepaz, count zero and myself about your plans, you immediately dismissed all our tips without argumentation (except some arguments of authority that have zero substance).
We see the exact same thing happening in this thread: you are dismissing every valid response from persons with tons of knowledge of csdb, software engineering, architecture and project management. And again, without argumentation.
This is off-putting and most likely the reason why people are not jumping aboard. At least for me it is.
Most of the "tips" were negative judgements and ridicule regarding my ideas for how I envisioned it working. Also it seemed that there is an assumption that I have not put any thought into the data schema and other steps required to take on a project like this. All of that is fine. I don't recall any arguments from authority. Someone did ask about my experience working on big data projects and I rattled off some of the projects I have been involved in.
I didn't mean for it to come off as dismissive. I appreciate all feedback. But when someone says "Oh that won't work. You need to do this." and doesn't explain why it won't work or doesn't offer to do any of the work they are suggesting, that is dismissive and not helpful. It takes no effort to shit on something. That is when I say "Thanks" and continue on with my plan. I'm not here to argue. This should be fun.
I have put a lot of thought into this before even mentioning it on irc or here. I agree that the data is very important. I think that people are making it more complex than it needs to be.
I think I have some ideas that will work. I'm putting together a proof of concept so that maybe it will better convey what I'm trying to do rather than people just assuming that I'm already fucking up.
I'm trying to avoid analysis paralysis. I'd rather do something, anything, to get things moving.
@Groepaz: Could you be more specific? Who are the people we need to get involved? |
| |
Shine
Registered: Jul 2012
Posts: 346 |
@instant:
Your project is brave in my eyes. (And long awaited by (at least) some people!)
You have to understand, that $ALL of this kind of ideas resulted in hot air in the past (sadly).
And if poeple don't give feedback or even a reply, you can be sure, that they are simply not interested in your project.
Anyways, keep on working and surprise us with your innovative ideas and executions. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11349 |
Quote:could you be more specific? Who are the people we need to get involved?
You already talked to half of them and were not listening. The other half can speak up if they want to - but knowing them, that will not happen, because they prefer to work behind the scenes. Those people will follow when the other half has actually made something worth talking about.
Quote:Most of the "tips" were negative judgements and ridicule regarding my ideas for how I envisioned it working.
When everyone tells you a relational db is what it needs, because the data is highly relational - and you dismiss it and in the next sentence say you need to do more research... yeah that is what will happen. It makes it look like you are not planning to listen to the people who actually know all the things you still need to research. |
| Previous - 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 - Next |
