BROWSE!?!

[dissidently]

Is it deliberate that cocoapads.org doesn't have plain, simple, thorough browsing by date, update or any other simple WHOLE browsing of ALL?

[kylef]

What about the archive page? http://blog.cocoapods.org/archives/

[dissidently]

Whilst that might well be an archive of whatever cocoapods.org DOES, it's not an archive of the PODS. More specifically, why must a search entry term be entered BEFORE browsing, which, by virtue of its restrictiveness, removes any chance to simply BROWSE?

[alloy]

You are commenting on the blog repo, not the pods search site.

And yes, for now it’s deliberate that you cannot browse on the pods search site.

[dissidently]

So where should I ask such a question?

[alloy]

https://github.com/CocoaPods/search.cocoapods.org, but it’s not really needed to file a ticket, these things are already planned way ahead and will definitely be added.

[dissidently]

The reason I ask if this is a deliberate omission of the most basic functionality of pod discovery is simply this: Software creators tend to assume the right to steer audiences and users, regardless of traditions, norms, expectations, context and the natural mediums of their "product". They do this for their own benefit, rather than that of the audience and end users. I'm trying to ascertain if this is the reasoning for this very odd choice, and therefore indicative of the rest of the attitude behind other odd choices.

[alloy]

The reason is the finite amount of time and having to prioritise things. There’s nothing odd about any of that.

[dissidently]

Given this statement:

"Ultimately, the goal is to improve discoverability of, and engagement in, third party open-source libraries, by creating a more centralized ecosystem."

And that a listing of ALL pods is the easiest path to discovery, for both users and yourself to program, I'm not entirely convinced that it's not odd. It is. In conjunction with a number of other odd assumptions throughout the website, it becomes more so.

The simplest way around this lack of truly easy discoverability, in the short term, is probably to add a tag or keyword to all of the pods, and make that known, so it can be entered in the search field.

• might do the trick, as it's sometimes considered a wildcard, but I'm sure you can think of something more appropriate.

[dissidently]

An example of true oddness.

From the home page:

"CocoaPods is the dependency manager for Objective-C projects. It has thousands of libraries and can help you scale your projects elegantly."

The use of the first "the" in the first sentence is very very odd. And not in a good way.

[alloy]

It’s marketing speak which I can understand some find odd, but we’re not going to change that.

[dissidently]

It's not marketing speak, at all. It's a flat out deception.

Marketing speak != DoubleSpeak.

Marketing speak inherently provides a framework for education, enlightenment and empowerment of an audience in the hope it'll allow them to see/perceive sufficient value in transitioning from amateur audience member to customer (users or premium audience member).

The way you're using it is instantly objectionable. It's the absolute opposite of Marketing speak.

[floere]

@dissidently A good way to browse all the pods is to start at the repository: https://github.com/CocoaPods/Specs Browse away!

[dissidently]

Hey Florian, THANKS!

I came across this previously but was unsure as to exactly what it was a list of, given both the title and subtitle. I'm not sure what Spec and specifications have to do with this being a list of "pods", so had no clue if this was exhaustive, potentials, previous or some other form of reference list.

[alloy]

The way you're using it is instantly objectionable.

Nope.

[dissidently]

One of the beauties of real marketing is surveys and analytics that provide objectification of the subjective, en masse.

Wanna place a bet?

[floere]

@dissidently The data of all existing pods are in that repository. That's it.

[alloy]

Wanna place a bet?

You might not have read the licenses on all of this, but I don’t owe you anything and I won’t spend more time bikeshedding when I already need that time to work more on getting the actual software to v1.

[dissidently]

There's an endemic and systemic oddness that's not positive, largely objectively objectionable and implicit within the majority of all other implications of the manner, state, structure and nature of cocoapods as it presents, appears to be and seemingly is, today.

You brought up marketing, not me. You have used marketing (as you consider it) throughout your site, blog, approaches and sponsorship approaches, etc. It seems important to you. It will probably be more so when you attempt to become a premium service.

The quality of pod contributors and their contributions will directly reflect how you treat them, what you assume yourselves to be and what you presume this service able to become.

This introduction to these qualities has been in miniature, off to the side, because I don't have a better way of instigating conversation about these current, real, possible and potential problems. All of which seem to stem from an attitude, the hardest thing to fix. Good luck.

[alloy]

Getting shit done is important to me. No is no, but you don’t seem understand that.

I don’t care much for your attitude which seems to be that you need to tell people what and why they are doing stuff wrong form your point of view. In fact, I find it very disrespectful.

It will probably be more so when you attempt to become a premium service.

If you are implying ‘premium’ as in charging money, then you are very wrong.

All the time we invest in making this for you for free, all costs we make for various purposes related to these projects, really all of it has always been free and will always be free as service to the community because of our love for OSS.

As such, I will tell you again: ‘I don’t owe you anything’. As long as you don’t understand that simple truth, this is just a useless discussion.

[dissidently]

I'm afraid you're missing the context and reason for the communication, completely, and failing to understand what this is all about.

Let's start with the obvious.

I've not asked for anything to be done.

Yet you've twice assumed that I have, and am. Other than the request for information as to the nature of the reasoning for not having a full browse feature, I have asked for nothing else.

So you're seemingly missing the point, and therefore wrongly assessing everything that's subsequently being stated. And I'll pass off your "feelings" of "disrespect" as part of that misunderstanding, because none is intended, whilst this is (most certainly) about feelings - the feelings of those of those that come to your site, service and community.

You are already a premium service - you've taken on sponsorships. I'm unsure as to the extent of that, or the potential future nature desired of those relationships, but there's little doubt that it's intended to be acknowledgement, appreciation, understanding and access to the minds of developers at a premium (sponsorship). There's a set of very strong indicators that advertising will be not so far down the road. At which point there can be no argument about this being a premium service. Who pays that premium is of no bearing to the term and truth of it being a premium service, site and community.

At no point have I suggested, opined or even vaguely intimated that you owe me anything. Yet you feel I have. That might be your misunderstanding in play, again.

This discussion, as useless as it may now seem, is suffering some crosstalk.

Let me be a little more explicit.

You're conflating your ideas of what can be done in marketing with what is marketing. It's going to cost you, this service, the site and your community. That's the premium of being arrogant, disrespectful of your audience, users and their understanding, feelings and natural responses to marketing DoubleSpeak.

You'd be far better off not jumping to assumptions. Instead, spend a couple of moments taking an objective look at your subjective communications. Then you might realise that objectionable, needless or obfuscating use of terms, words and turns of phrase DO exist, are largely objective despite their subjective reality and are consequential. They have an immediate and ongoing impact on your site, service and existing community are perceived by potential users, providers, sponsors, advertisers, contributors and passers by -> your audience.

Now, if you'll excuse me, dinner is served. I have a penchant for great food and fine wine. These are subjective words for subjective experiences that have an objective impact on my life and well being. See how that works?

[orta]

Hi, I made the decision to not add browse originally because there are ATM better resources for it, e.g. https://www.cocoacontrols.com and it meant we could build the site and then carry on building infrastructure.

When we get around to doing it, and we will, it will be lovely, but there's only so much time in the day and we all have jobs that pay our bills.

There's no need for all this negativity.

[dissidently]

what negativity?