How can we improve user feedback experience? (Bug reports and feature requests)

[ldorigo]

3313 seems to point out that the user feedback process for TW isn't optimal.

It forces non-technical users to make GitHub issues, which are usually not up to the standards of developers. Also, it doesn't allow for a clear view of what the community (of users) wants most: there are a bazillion open issues with little to no structure.

I would propose a vote-based system where users can post ideas, comment on other people ideas and vote for the most wanted features. A quick search shows there are some open source projects that aim to allow just that:

http://www.phpback.org/

Comments?

I'm in exams right now but I can try to set up a demo in the next days, so you can try it and see what you think of it.

[pmario]

I did have an other search and found: https://feathub.com/ which can be directly linked to TiddlyWiki on github.

It looks simple. So I did set up a "throw away" test. I'll post "working link" soon.

[ldorigo]

I like the very simple interface, but I don't like that the only login option is through GitHub - since there were talks of moving away from GitHub (for end users). Looking at the other projects on that platform, it also seems more geared towards technical users than just normal ones.

[pmario]

If you want to play with it. I did create my first request there :) https://feathub.com/feathub/feathub/+58

[pmario]

please up-vote :)

[pmario]

I like the very simple interface, but I don't like that the only login option is through GitHub - since there were talks of moving away from GitHub (for end users).

github will do the "user management" heavy lifting and we are a github project. ...

• We want users to sign on with github.
  • Especially, since we want them to star the project as well!!!!!!!!
• If you ever want to contribute to the project you have to sign the Contributor license agreement anyway.

[pmario]

There is an other project, which was requested quite a bit: Chat

eg: https://gitter.im/TiddlyWiki/public ... which is also linked to github, because it makes the whole user management task simple. There are some other goodies, which I'd like to use.

[twMat]

http://www.phpback.org/

That would be one of those totally separate solutions that have come and gone in the TW comunity over the years. They have all failed so a friendly advice is to not spend time on it.

https://feathub.com/

That might be close enough to the github system we already have so it might be a working solution.

Overall my conclusion after 10+ years in the TW community is that we need something that people are very familiar with and where we would have full control to shape into the needs that come up. The type of user feedback this OP deals with does not have to be integrated in the code so it's pretty trivial. I firmly this could be dealt with using an in-house TW construction. This would bring several advantages over some 3d part system including familiarity and good control of the UI and features. And it is the only common system we know everyone already uses!

Considering the recent and exciting developments for various TW "set-ups", I believe we are approaching solutions for a "TiddlyWiki Federation". Jedi master @inmysocks is very familiar with the knots needed to be solved for this and would probably agree that it should be possible to create a system that requires minimal administration - because that is a key question: who should "be responsible" for such a system? A federated TW network would (could) mean that people post in their own wikis and only fetch from whoever they trust. For a harmless "vote" you may accept (i.e fetch) input from "the whole community" whereas "messages" might only be accepted from "close friends". And you could tweak your own TW to present the data in ways that no other systems can, including you could have it integrate and even interact with your personal data!

An in-house system would also contribute to development of the TW project itself. No small deal. And, even bigger, if a system of federated networking TWs is built then this will be a game changer for the whole TW project and how to use TWs.

It would IMO be much more meaningful to finally sort out how to solve "TW federation" than trying to shoe horn our needs into other peoples creations.

Note that the actual code repository, wherever it resides, would still be used and would not (necessarily) be affected by this.

[pmario]

There is a native github search: https://github.com/Jermolene/TiddlyWiki5/issues?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+sort%3Areactions-%2B1-desc+

[ldorigo]

@pmario:

github will do the "user management" heavy lifting and we are a github project. ...

Ok, fair enough. It also doesn't take much even for a total newb to create an account on GitHub, so maybe my remark wasn't justified.

There is an other project, which was requested quite a bit: Chat

Yes, please, yes!

Both these things (Gitter and FeatHub) seem to me like very sensible solutions - if they get duly promoted to the community. We can maybe work to set them up properly in the next day(s), and then make a pull request to promote their use both on the GitHub's README and on TiddlyWiki's website?

@twMat :

... I firmly this could be dealt with using an in-house TW construction.

This may be a great idea in the long run, but it requires careful crafting in order for it to be functional.

A federated TW network would (could) mean that people post in their own wikis and only fetch from whoever they trust. For a harmless "vote" you may accept (i.e fetch) input from "the whole community" whereas "messages" might only be accepted from "close friends".

I love the idea of a decentralized social platform (for TiddlyWiki or otherwise), but again this is something that can take months to years to be implemented.

It would IMO be much more meaningful to finally sort out how to solve "TW federation" than trying to shoe horn our needs into other peoples creations.

While I love TW's polymorphism, I also like using the right tool for the right job. User feedback system were developed for a specific goal: aggregate user feedback on a given application. What's wrong with using one?

[AnthonyMuscio]

I have set up a Yammer network for TiddlyWiki which would be ideal for this, instead of voting (although this can be done) just having people endorse a proposal brings it to the top of the threads and the number of supporting comments will indicate the value/ importance. Yammer allows real time chat and longer term conversations, user or curator started groups and the ability to share content between groups, to name but a few features.

Files and images can be shared, links and references documented and the search allows people to search for questions previously answered much more effectively that most.

I know I need to persuade people, but I am totally convinced this would be a benefit to the TiddlyWiki community. All I need is a few early adopters to test it.

Go here https://www.yammer.com/tiddlywiki and provide your email address work or gmail etc... and I will invite you ASAP. If you have a personal or work Office account consider using that.

Do not be scared off by the groups, just post in All Network to get started.

Regards Tony

[AnthonyMuscio]

I am in Australia so I may be delayed in accepting your request if I am sound asleep. In Future I mat be able automate or share this.

[pmario]

I'm working on a proof of concept to get the whole thing going. Using "open source" tools only! Will try to publish more info on sunday.

[ldorigo]

I'm also much more in favor of an open-source solution than Microsoft's freemium product (wait, github is becoming Microsoft's freemium product. Damn.)

@pmario is that with feathub? That's great, curious to see what it looks like :-)

[AnthonyMuscio]

Well I would love to see your alternatives, But it is NOT true that open source is the Only way and this solution is not FREEMIUM, it is effectively FREE.

And as ldorigo commented GitHub is going that way. I expect as a result we may actively find some integration coming along.

Remember Gmail, Slack and other services are not necessarily open source, they are open use, and whilst I expect you are surprised Microsoft is doing this, they are, and had to change.

I am a big believer in open source but I also know some corporate solutions are actually better. This solution is more than a decade old and has millions of users including in the top 500 corporations.

But initially, I am simply inviting you to look, and there is a use case even if the community uses other tools.

Open minds please.

Tony

[pmario]

is that with feathub? That's great, curious to see what it looks like :-)

no. feathub seems to be dead. ...

[AnthonyMuscio]

This gives me the opportunity to mention, The death of worthy Open Source solutions is actually a little more common than the death of enterprise class solutions from one of the top 5 international companies.

Mario, What requirements are you hoping to satisfy with the open source solutions?

I have taken a lot of TiddlyWiki community requirements from the last few years and are building a solution I hope the community like and endorse, the "community conversation" is but one. However I have some fairly extensive solutions I hope to present as well, also hosted on open source software a WordPress Network, and the ability to host TiddlyWikis etc...

One of my key requirements is these can all be integrated, keeping current knowledge but extending the ability to build the community resources.

Regards Tony

[pmario]

Open minds please.

I'm using (have to use) MS products since 1989, and I have seen how they behave. ... Now there is a lot of free stuff, for basic usage. ... But as soon as you need to do "real work", or want to use advanced features, you'll hit the pay-wall.

This behaviour will never change. That's OK, since MS is a for provit only company.

But as long as I have the possibility to "own my data" I'll choose and promote open solutions.

[AnthonyMuscio]

Fair enough, I have these experiences as well however this in not the case here and there are changes.

Even if there were a freemium it would be good enough, but this is the full featured solution. Just as I have always asked people to keep an open mind about open source I am asking the reverse here.

What do you think of gmail, Facebook, and that lot?

Tony

[ldorigo]

@AnthonyMuscio I sent you a request. Besides the open source/non open source discussion, I'm not sure this Yammer is really the best fit for this problem: It seems more like an internal team board than a user feedback platform?

[pmario]

What do you think of gmail, Facebook, and that lot?

You won't find me on Facebook and you never will. I'll leave gmail, because of "smart compose". I don't even have words in english, to describe, what I think about this development.

[Jermolene]

I look at feathub and see something that could be done very easily in TiddlyWiki. We've now got several multiuser options for TiddlyWiki and I do think we should explore eating our own dogfood...

[AnthonyMuscio]

Mario,

It is important for you to recognise this need not replace any effort you are putting in to improve user feedback experience, however there may be value gained.

I really respect your skills and input but I ask you to explore what I am suggesting rather than take a position informed by prior experience, even if we use this to select another solution with some of the features contained within.

There are obvious relationships between what I am sharing and improving user feedback and thus I shared in this thread, but I am not riding over others ideas and contributions. It would be sad to think you would take a position without exploring the solution, and for you to assume I am trying to "steam roll" this in..

It would take a Masters paper to describe all the details of this alternate solution and compare it to all the others that have passed our way, google groups and Git included. I would be prepared to write it but if someone is saying they wont even read it what would be the value? Thus the easiest thing is to present, play and dabble.

Regards Tony

[AnthonyMuscio]

Jeremy,

I could not agree more, but such solutions should be informed by effective solutions we can already look at, and emulate the best of them. It will also take time to do this so I hope what ever we do we get some improvements sooner than later.

Can I suggest abandoning the phrase "eating our own dog food" and replace if with the much nicer "drinking our own Champaign"

[pmario]

Hi folks, you may be interested in a new Video series I did upload today. ... It' about improving Community Communication.

The whole thing is an experiement, so we can heavily test it, without damaging anything.

Videos 1-4 show a possible "feature request" forkflow. ... I know it can be improved, but I think it's a nice and simple start.

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLuiC_HFhI4OyUiDGqvzB64mTQTURABjlW

[pmario]

I really respect your skills and input but I ask you to explore what I am suggesting rather than take a position informed by prior experience, even if we use this to select another solution with some of the features contained within.

I did request an account. ... So I can have a look. ...

[pmario]

Mario, What requirements are you hoping to satisfy with the open source solutions?

All of them. ... I want to enable community members, to participate at different levels to whole project. From user-feedback to community released documentation.

I'll try to start with things, that make a difference.

• User feedback
• Feature requests
• Voting

See videos 1-4 from the link above.

The other things will need developers to request access to the different gropus and repos, so we can see, how different roles behave. ...

I have an idea from the permissions overview but real live makes a difference here :)

[AnthonyMuscio]

Mario,

The Videos look great, I will work through them soon. (I sent that invitation but may response may seem slow with me in the UTC +10 time zone.) From what I see your approach is fantastic, and I do not see a clash between GG, Yammer and your proposal. The key thing is to document, promote and mention the appropriate channel for the appropriate work. I also think where ever we can we move solutions into TiddlyWiki versions as per your proposed landing page, or ate least tie them directly to TiddlyWiki instances.

[pmario]

I did have a very short look at Yammer. .. For me it looks like a mixture of Facebook, Twitter, discuss and a little bit of next-cloud's file sharing possibility. That's what I saw in 5 minutes.

I do not see a clash between GG, Yammer and your proposal.

I don't think there is a clash. ... We'll see how it turns out. ... I'll have a closer look about the [https://portal.office.com/Commerce/Mosa.aspx](Terms of Service) tomorrow. .. we'll see.

[AnthonyMuscio]

I agree it is "like" facebook and twitter in some ways, however it is not so public, we can maintain some control and curation over it, and people need to make a conscious step to join. This also means that it is not as anonymous as the public social networks and experience shows this tends to result in much more respectful conversations. People work to build a reputation and normal social customs are employed rather than the free for all public mess many social media networks are.

To me this means we do need to present public resources that people will discover through search and organic growth. Somewhat like GG does however with user friendly material, solutions based material with the advantage we can improve and develop such material because it does not move "into the wild".

I will see what other legal statements and service gaurentees I can find. The one you refer to may not be the most applicable. If we were to take Yammer on I would be prepared to sponsor it if nominal fees were asked for, however it is important we are not squeezed for money in the future. Building a network, is intellectual property we want to retain.

Not withstanding that It is important to recognise in time we may be able to build tiddlywiki equivalents for micro-blogging and may even exit tools like yammer.