People:
I can't tell you how much I appreciate the significance of
http://rubyforge.org site. I'm very grateful to the kind people
maintaining it.
I have one concern, though... have you tried the search feature of the
site? It does not return very significant results. For example, I
searched "state machine" under software/groups category and a whole lot
(and I _mean_ a lot!) of non-relevant results appeared (try it if you
don't believe me :).
Is there anything I can do to improve this? I'm not sure of what's the
software powering rubyforge's. I have not much knowledge about search
engines, but I have successfully implemented the search feature in a
couple of rails applications using ferret and ultrasphinx, so I know
this could work a little better.
But! I have the suspect that a non-ruby application is powering
rubyforge right now.... after looking around for a while I haven't found
which software is running rubyforge. Is it opensource? Can we help
improving it?
Maybe this could be better implemented using a document-oriented
database approach, I'm not sure about this subject though as I have
never implemented such a system.
http://rddb.rubyforge.org/
http://incubator.apache.org/couchdb/
···
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
Yup, it's GForge - http://gforge.org/ - and I think it's basically using the SQL LIKE keyword to drive the searches 
. There have been some discussions about moving away from GForge, but migrating the current data is a bit of a sticky wicket. To be fair to GForge, we're using a rather old version of it - the newer versions are probably better.
Yours,
Tom
···
On Aug 11, 2008, at 11:55 PM, Emmanuel Oga wrote:
People:
I can't tell you how much I appreciate the significance of
http://rubyforge.org site. I'm very grateful to the kind people
maintaining it.
I have one concern, though... have you tried the search feature of the
site? It does not return very significant results. For example, I
searched "state machine" under software/groups category and a whole lot
(and I _mean_ a lot!) of non-relevant results appeared (try it if you
don't believe me :).
Is there anything I can do to improve this? I'm not sure of what's the
software powering rubyforge's. I have not much knowledge about search
engines, but I have successfully implemented the search feature in a
couple of rails applications using ferret and ultrasphinx, so I know
this could work a little better.
But! I have the suspect that a non-ruby application is powering
rubyforge right now.... after looking around for a while I haven't found
which software is running rubyforge. Is it opensource? Can we help
improving it?
Tom Copeland wrote:
Yup, it's GForge - http://gforge.org/ - and I think it's basically
using the SQL LIKE keyword to drive the searches . There have
been some discussions about moving away from GForge, but migrating the
current data is a bit of a sticky wicket. To be fair to GForge, we're
using a rather old version of it - the newer versions are probably
better.
Ah! probably php... Is there any ruby alternative suitable for the
job? If not, is there any way we could help to make the update to a
newer gforge version happen?
···
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/\.
Tom Copeland wrote:
Yup, it's GForge - http://gforge.org/ - and I think it's basically
using the SQL LIKE keyword to drive the searches . There have
been some discussions about moving away from GForge, but migrating the
current data is a bit of a sticky wicket. To be fair to GForge, we're
using a rather old version of it - the newer versions are probably
better.
Ah! probably php...
Right on, yup, it's in PHP.
Is there any ruby alternative suitable for the
job?
redmine seems to be the leader at the moment. But the sticky bit is moving the data over, I think...
If not, is there any way we could help to make the update to a
newer gforge version happen?
I just need to set aside some time to try it out. Doing a GForge upgrade involves running a lot of migrations (more or less), so I want to make sure nothing breaks horribly...
Yours,
Tom
···
On Aug 12, 2008, at 10:49 AM, Emmanuel Oga wrote: