Introduce tiers.md #242
Introduce tiers.md #242
Conversation
| docs-searchbar.js | #3 | | ||
| Firebase | #3 | | ||
| Dart | #3 | | ||
| Java | #3 | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why Java is only on tier #3?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I hope they will! But for now, since we don't have data coming from the Java users, Java is #3. I'll share what is my rationale behind the list and the order after merging this first version :)
brunoocasali
dismissed stale reviews from bidoubiwa and alallema
via
797572e
| .NET | #2 | | ||
| Rust | #2 | | ||
| Symfony | #3 | | ||
| docs-searchbar.js | #3 | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is there a reason not to have doc-scrapper in the list?
That's potentially something we will want to maintain / replace actively at some point because It's an excellent opener to get many projects moving from Algolia (but not only) to Meilisearch for their documentation.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not really. It is just because we don't have the User Agent there!
resources/tiers.md
Outdated
|
|
||
| ### How to identify which tier an SDK belongs to? | ||
|
|
||
| It is possible by accessing the README.md of each repository. A tier badge is present below the Meilisearch logo. The badge can have the following values: "tiers #1", "tiers #2" and "tiers #3". For example: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not convinced that adding the badges is a good idea. SDK's will still work with the latest versions of Meilisearch and most users will be satisfied with its current state.
By warning them that this is a low priority SDK it might result in:
- User fearing deprecation
- User complaining because they don't want their SDK in that tier list even if they would never user the missing features
- Give the impression that we are going backward in activity like a "cut in budget"
If something is missing, an issue exist in any case with the missing feature which reassure the user that we did not forget about the SDK, provide them a place to tell us they need it, and help them implement it if they want it sooner than later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't want to give up of the badges 😢. But I have to agree with you on that.
Co-authored-by: Guillaume Mourier <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Guillaume Mourier <[email protected]>
|
Before approving this, I would love to come to a conclusion about the possible badges and communication around the tiers. I don't know if by
You meant we keep them anyway, or if you open the possibility to talk about it? From my point of view, if I use a tool and the maintainers communicate about the fact that they are not going to be as focussed on that tool as before, I lose trust in the tool and change it ASAP to something more actively maintained. |
After discussing it privately, I agreed to remove the badge system, it will bring more cons than pro's at this time, so the idea is to add it later if needed :) |
This is the first version of the tiers concept we are introducing to our processes.
I will provide the details about how the list was made and share it in future iterations (if possible - since it can contain sensitive data).