allanderek
Joined 10 years ago
Joined 10 years ago
I also still think you want example dreams to be viewable by anyone. I believe that few people sign-up without a good idea of the kind of thing they are signing-up for.
But the actual app, is great. I like the output, but I would consider sorting them into those dependencies which are up to date and those which are not.
If you really want some extra user-friendlyness and learn a bit of the github API, that would be a cool way to accept input. Instead of copy&pasting the pip-freeze output, how about just your github repository link, you could then search for a requirements.txt (or similar), OR a first effort at this would be to allow users to link to a requirements.txt file, for example one hosted on github.
Finally, what about a spin-off pypi library to do this? I'd love to be able to do this from the command-line inside my project's directory.
1. Occasionally at the 'Prompts' screen, pressing the reload icon causes a blank prompt, which means there is no reload icon. Hence the user has to refresh the entire page.
2. In the "prompt" screen the place which I think is for some title text from the user does not show what is typed. The user can see the cursor moving, but no text, they can select the text but it is not highlighted. You can select copy & paste the text elsewhere. Suggesting that the text colour is just the same as the background colour.
Other than that, you have small logos in the top right, but the logos are far from clear what they actually do. Home, Settings and (probably) logout are clear, but the other two are not so clear.A bit more feedback on illegal moves would be a good addition. Even better would be feed-forward, such as dimming the places that the current chip cannot be placed. With a tool-tip explaining why, even better.
Probably a bit late for you to change since you have your domain name, but the name kind of suggests code reviews. But I don't think you're really aiming for code reviews correct? You're aiming for a kind of package reputation?
A related project shown here as well: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11481459
There I wrote a comment about how package reputation systems have the slight problem about what to do when a package is updated. A review may then be out-of-date, but you cannot just delete old reviews since they may still be quite appropriate. So it isn't an easily solved problem.
Is it possible to buy one? I could not tell from the website. I'm no customer expert but I guess that many visitors want to know two things 1. is it possible to buy this now? and 2. how much does it/is it going to, cost?
I understand there are several models, but still someone just wants a rough costing. Does such a bike cost the roughly the same as a traditional bike of the same quality or is it currently much more expensive? So, can one such bike be had for somewhere between $500-1000 or is more like $5000?
The lack of any price makes me assume the latter, and I just get out of there before I find out any more information about the actual bike.
On my browser (Firefox-Linux) if I open the hamburger menu on the right, and click, say, API usage, the content is pushed off to the left and I can't even scroll it back. The only thing I can do is close the hamburger menu to properly see the content.
I was going to give a couple of comments assuming that you were hoping to turn some visitors into paying customers, but this seems to be an entirely free service.
I was going to say that "Python based" is a positive for some and a negative for others. I'm not sure it needs to be in the list of features and surely does not need to be the first feature. What should be first? "Unlimited Users", though not the use of the word "currently" may well put some people off. It suggests that this will not be free in the future, which perhaps it won't be. I don't know.
Secondly, a REST-API is great, focus more on it being something that can be integrated into a developer's application. The others, Python based, Machine Learning, Crafted With Love, Minimum Downtime are not really features at all. Python based and Machine Learning are just implementation details, the first is not really important and Machine Learning is kind of the assumed method of spam filtering. So overall your list of features scream you claiming "This is really good honest", rather than demonstrating that.
The Python API example is good, this is what a Python programmer cares about, they might dig a little deeper and be pleasantly surprised to find the whole thing is developed in Python.
In general, it's hard to see any unique selling point here. Why would a developer use this spam filter over a self-hosted one, or other existing one? I'm not saying there isn't a unique selling point, just that your website does not make this abundantly clear.
Such discussions usually die out after some people give their opinions on what such a package curation/voting system should be like, whilst others state why we should not have such a system.
For my money, most of the objections are really just people pointing out that it is a very difficult to design problem. Rather than objecting to the actual idea.
So anyway, it's really nice to see some actual working code.
A few of comments:
1. You describe this as the "go-to Python Toolbox", but I'm not sure that really describes what it is well. It's really a summary of github statistics. Even forgetting how the packages are rated, you have a package rating system rather than a single toolbox. I think what you have is more interesting than a single python toolbox.
2. You have not quite solved the major complaint that usually comes up in discussions of such package voting systems. That is, that a package is not generally just "good" or "bad", but appropriate or not appropriate for given uses. Furthermore, I think the 'Popularity' metric is not quite obvious from a first look at, say, a package category. In other words, it's not quite obvious that this is a measure of how the github repository is starred. At least then the user can decide themselves whether or not this is a useful metric.
3. Github stars is not a bad measure. A better one would include the ability to downvote.
4. Pretty much all repulation/voting systems have the problem that for any "votes", or even full-blown reviews, it's not clear which version of the library they are about. This is really difficult to solve. Since you only have positive votes the problem is not so pronounced as it is in other systems (or proposed systems). But the basic problem is that a bunch of users downvote a library because it is difficult to use, or doesn't have tests, or they cannot install it etc. The developer takes that into consideration and produces a new version of the library, what should the reputation system do? It's really not a trivial question. You still have that issue in that a bunch of users may have decided not to star a library because of an earlier version. They may even star a library which later becomes less useful, for example because it is superceded by a better library, or because the code degrades. I understand users can unstar a repository, or flock to a new one, but still, the general problem is not entirely solved. That said, using GitHub stars probably suffers from this problem less than other measures.
5. I really like the look of it. I think the colour scheme for Python is the best of the three so far.
I can perhaps imagine someone tweeting something like: "I've just published a new book, get it here", where 'here' is a link, which might send the user to the correct Amazon page based on their location (eg. amazon.com for US users and amazon.co.uk for UK based users).
Put another way, have you ever been reading a file and thought "Oh I wonder which project this belongs to and who wrote it? I'll check the top."