Clean up old Drupal aggregator links (Planet and Talk)

We can probably take a look at some of the older ones, but generally we're looking to cleanup sites that are having problems with current content, not just feeds that haven't been updated in a while.

+1 to Dave Reid's #1 – given the fact that Agaric's on the list and hasn't posted in a long while, but it's because we're taking our time to provide quality! Not sure why we come up as no data– maybe because when we redesigned, and offloaded old posts to http://data.agaric.com we didn't add planet ones back– remembering the Lullabot takeover of the planet after their redesign ;-)

It's been a tough year for blogging on ezra-g.com, but I do intend to write more for Planet, so I ask to continue to be included. Thanks!

@Benjamin: I think it's "no data" because there are zero posts in the category: http://agaric.com/taxonomy/term/19/0

I'm mixed on this idea in general. It does reduce visual clutter in the left sidebar and reduces the resource consumption of drupal.org. On the other hand, drupal.org has resources to spare in this department and the visual clutter is a small problem, IMO. You could also look at it as something that shows vibrance.

I think a simple "I want to stay in planet" should be enough to keep people in the list.

I posted this on IRC to get eyes on it since not everyone reads the issue queue. I suggest not removing anyone without at least putting a post on Planet with the intent and preferably contacting the individuals that will be removed. While my blog didn't make the list, it has gone quite a while without an update because I'm not a regular blogger. But, when I do have something to say, I don't want to have to ask to get re-added to Planet first.

Michelle

I think we're all agreed that any dead sites should be removed, so let's just do that.

For sites that haven't been updated since 2008, I think a heads-up is appropriate.

gdemet's suggestion sounds like a reasonable approach.

I think we should remove the obviously broken ones and leave the rest alone. There's really no reason to do something here from a performance pov since the aggrregation is now done by a drush job.

Writing to all these people might be a bit too much work (but then if somebody wants to do it...).

Writing to each person or organization would be a lot of work. What about updating the issue where being added to Planet was originally requested?

please remove joshmiller from the planet :)

I will ask to be re-added when I have something more to say... Too busy making sites to worry about writing posts.

Josh

Re #12, joshmiller has been removed from Planet.

I do think it is a good idea to delete inactive Drupal blogs from the Planet. I would suggest though that this action shouldn't be a one time event but a policy that moves us forward in routine maintenance/administration of the planet.

Personally, I would be fine with a policy that says if a feed that doesn't contain a new post within the past two years those feeds should automatically be removed from Planet Drupal. This also creates an incentive for those on this list to actually contribute a quality post from time to time so as to not be knocked of the Planet.

It seems that Phase2 got dropped in this process, though we are hardly inactive in blogging about Drupal. We have put up about 10 great posts this month with useful information for community members. Maybe part of the reason is that we were never listed by company name, but by blog name. This is a good opportunity to fix that too. So the blog is http://www.agileapproach.com/. Would you mind adding back?

@jwalpole, I still see agileapproach at http://drupal.org/aggregator/sources/213 as part of Drupal Planet and updating every 3 hours. I clicked to update your content and it said there was new syndicated content, but I don't see anything new.

Really your feed shouldn't be based on the site's front-page but based on a "Drupal Planet" tag. Let's create a new issue to fix your site. It seems like you are tagging your content with "Drupal Planet" but I don't see a feed for it from the site. In your new issue, please include the url of that feed.

I recognize about 2/3 of the names in this list. Other than the completely broken ones, they still have relevant content, despite the fact that they haven't been updated since 2009 because the authors moved onto other non-Drupal things (and might be back in the future). I don't see any sort of compelling reason to remove these resources from the community.

I'd rather any removal policy be more oriented around removing completely broken feeds, 404s, stuff that causes watchdog() to throw an error or would cause end-users to go "Huh? WTF?" (e.g. a taxonomy feed's been replaced with porn)

<off-topic>
I'm noticing a disturbing trend in the webmasters team lately of trying to develop and enforce an elaborate set rules for every possible situation. Maybe this has been going on for quite awhile and I've just been blissfully unaware of it because I've been so busy with Drupal 7 for the past 3 years. But we seriously, seriously, need to knock this trend off. It's disturbing as hell.

This "rules creep" seemingly started with CVS applications, now it's seeping into the Planet, and now we're seemingly seriously suggesting that we impose rules on our busy contributors about how often they need to blog, lest they face punitive measures. WTF?

If we have real, actual human brains with this kind of time, I have a bunch of issues in the D7 queue that could use help, you could help fix redesign bugs, you could help with the views bug squad, suggest Google Code-In tasks, or any number of other vastly more pressing things that improve the community and do not create ire and ill-will towards the D.o administrators.
</off-topic>

I strongly do not want to go through and just purge old feeds. We should only act when they're a problem. It doesn't need to be too hard and doesn't need to suck a lot of time.

Sprocket can be removed.

+100 to webchick's comment (the other +99 are for the people who didn't come because their company's name didn't pop up on Google Alerts as a result of it being thrown around as a 'spammer' for not following a rule created by <10 people with zero discussion with the non-webmaster community).

When exactly are these webmaster elections so I can vote out the people who are making so much hay out of seemingly non-existing problems?

One *huge* issue here is that, in general, people only come to the webmaster issue queue (or any issue queue) when they have a problem, but nobody creates issues when they think things are going well. So... all the complainers about the Planet are getting heard, and very few supporters, but that means *nothing* in regards to actual user experience.

I really feel this is something that the DA should address, since d.o. is a home to all of us. Even helping to rebuild the planet for the redesign wasn't enough for my company's name to get drug through a bit of mud once a grand total of <10 people decided they knew what was best for all of us, and yes, that is total bs.

If only I was webmaster I'd ban all of you! ;-)

@Alex: You're really making a bigger deal out of this than it needs to be and are coming across as quite insulting. The word "spam" doesn't even show up in this issue until your post. No one is calling anyone a spammer. This is just people getting together and trying to fix a problem. Anyone in the community is welcome to join in. This isn't some group of elites trying to force the community to our standards. It's a discussion of what to do about a problem. If the answer is do nothing because it isn't a problem, well, then so be it. But jumping on us for volunteering to care for this site is really not nice.

Michelle

@Michelle- if it's not a big deal, then why all the talk of 'purges'? I'm sorry, but finding my company mentioned in a purge on d.o. over a planet post (via Google Web Alerts) is *very* insulting, especially because I just *personally* paid someone to help with the redesign of the Planet, and have offered more assistance in improving the UX of it. You don't think we're talking about SPAM here? Here's Wikipendia on what constitutes SPAM:

Spam is the use of electronic messaging systems (including most broadcast media, digital delivery systems) to send unsolicited bulk messages indiscriminately. While the most widely recognized form of spam is e-mail spam, the term is applied to similar abuses in other media: instant messaging spam, Usenet newsgroup spam, Web search engine spam, spam in blogs, wiki spam, online classified ads spam, mobile phone messaging spam, Internet forum spam, junk fax transmissions, social networking spam, television advertising and file sharing network spam.

I'm sorry, but I don't think there is actually a problem with job postings, outside of a few people griping about it.

I opened the following post to help decide who and what is not welcome on Planet Drupal: #958318: Remove text about "what is not welcome on Planet Drupal" from /about/drupal-planet. In regards to the openness of the webmaster's group, I'll apply and put my $$$ where my mouth is (as I always try to do).

And in the interest of moving this post in a constructive direction, could we just alter the ordering of the planet listings so that the most recent posting person/org/company shows up on top? This would have the added benefit of encouraging more frequent posting, though it might encourage shorter postings (the current policies could help ease this concern). We could then 'hide' anyone who hasn't posted for the past X years, thus eliminating them from the "active" list without removing them permanently from the Planet. And yes, I'm happy to 'volunteer' our staff for this, though it will be hard for us to get to before the new year. Another way to go is make this another GCI project and see if someone takes it on.

Thanks to webchick's rants and the backlash here, I don't want to be a part of this process at this point. I guess I'm a burden to the community and a bastard for not contributing more to more important things than trying to help contribute to keeping the Planet manageable and enjoyable to our community.

I wouldn't call what I posted above a "rant". I would call it voicing a serious concern. If you want to see an actual rant, you could look up my Drupal Core Developer Summit talk on our CVS applications process. :P

Here's the thing. The Drupal community gains an awful lot by having a centralized hub of activity. Having a "one-stop shop" for all modules and themes, development initiatives, support forums, Drupal-related news, etc. means a larger, more diverse community who works together to make Drupal awesome. But. That centralized hub means the webmasters team is given an awful lot of power over Drupal peoples' lives given what processes and rules it puts in place and enforces.

When we as the webmasters team introduce new rules and processes, we need to take very serious look at what real, actual problems we are attempting to solve. And make damned sure that they balance out the "pain in the ass factor" we are enforcing on our contributors. Remember: these folks are the 0.05% (or less) of people who instead of taking away from Drupal, give something back.

So again, what real, actual problems would removing people who haven't posted to the Planet in awhile solve, that won't be counter-balanced by someone like dopry coming back to the community after a 2-year hiatus and being told that despite him basically writing core's file and image API for Drupal 7, he now has to jump through hoops to get his blog re-added to the Planet as if he was some random nobody with zero track record who we had to make sure wasn't trying to spam us with viagra ads. Absolutely none, from what I can see.

Now. I'm not sure how you go from that to inferring that I think Dave Reid is "a burden to the community" or some kind of "bastard"? WTF, Dave?

Webchick, sorry I took your rant and the actions of others little personally and tensions are high here.

For post people it takes 1 minute for them to add a 'Drupal Planet' tag and review their current content assigned to the tag. I thought we've even been willing to be flexible on the number of posts in the feed for long-time contributors. For job postings I find no problem with a nice detailed Planet post about a worthwhile topic and then a small paragraph at the end with something similar to "Like what we're doing at Company X? We have open positions for foobar developers and ferzles. See our recent post.".

To re-iterate my stance, I disagree very strongly about removing older feeds. We just update our standards by community decision, and then handle feeds that have problems on a case-by-case basis exactly like we have been for a while. The only time I'm ok with multiple feed-purging is for non-working feeds like 404s.

Ok, to close out the intent of this post, can I get a +1 for not removing older feeds? We can file a separate issue or feeds that are no longer working, which should be removed.

Agreed. +1.

+1.

Unless broken, or completely different (happened before on site migrations), the advantage of aggregators is that they stand by until there's something to do. If it poses no strain on infra as killes indeed tells us, then they should be kept.

It's also less work.

@Alex: Purging is just getting rid of stuff that shouldn't be there. Cleaning it up. It's really not as offensive as you're trying to make it sound. I went back and looked at the post where your company is mentioned and he's simply asking what should be done, if you should be contacted. It's just clarifying the policy. No one is calling you a spammer. This was a pretty calm discussion, actually, until you jumped in and started yelling at the volunteers for trying to make Planet better.

Frankly, I'm with Dave. If just trying to make something better is going to get me treated like I'm some kind of fascist, then forget it. I really don't care enough to be insulted for trying to help. There's plenty of other things vying for my attention. Do what you want with Planet. If it becomes a cesspool, because everyone's afraid to hurt someone's feelings by trying to clean it up, I'll just unsubscribe and ignore it.

Michelle

@Michelle- I'm sorry, but that's not the definition of purge. Though I'm sure your intentions are innocent, it most certainly is a term reserved to fascists and tyrants. (At least now I guess I know why my "witty" retorts weren't met with much response: maybe more people don't know what it means, esp. in terms of "cleaning up" a community)

Wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purge

In history and political science, a purge is the removal of people who are considered undesirable by those in power from a government, from another organization, or from society as a whole. Purges can be peaceful or violent; many will end with the imprisonment or exile of those purged, but in some cases they will simply be removed from office. Restoring people who have been purged is known as rehabilitation.

Mirriam-Webster - http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/purge

purge verb \ˈpərj\
1
a : to clear of guilt
b : to free from moral or ceremonial defilement
2
a : to cause evacuation from (as the bowels)
b (1) : to make free of something unwanted <purge a manhole of gas> <purge yourself of fear> (2) : to free (as a boiler) of sediment or relieve (as a steam pipe) of trapped air by bleeding
c (1) : to rid (as a nation or party) by a purge (2) : to get rid of <the leaders had been purged>

Anyway, that topic has been (appropriately) renamed, and hopefully you can understand why anyone would be concerned with seeing it used within this community. And sorry if you felt like I was treating users of the term like fascists, but, well, they usually are.

I'm curious what people think of just using a jQuery sorting plugin to order the items and use another jQuery action to hide feeds that haven't been updated in over 2 years (unless a user clicks something to reveal them).

Definition b(1) is exactly what this is. There are posts / feeds that were considered unwanted and a discussion was started to take care of the problem. I maintain this was a calm discussion to try and set policy before you came into it. You maintain that we're all fascists. I guess we're at an impasse. At any rate, I'm done with it and seriously questioning whether I'm going to continue volunteering my time for this community. I'm tired of the drama.

Michelle

Michelle- so you pick the definition referring to non-human/social settings and that's supposed to prove... what exactly? (also note that even this definition has connotations of passing gas/bowel movements) If you can't understand why talk of 'getting rid of unwanted' voices within the community, while inferring that they're just 'hot air', might be offensive, then how about this: many of us ended up in the US because our parents/grandparents/great-grandparents were 'purged' from societies trying to 'cleanse' themselves. I'm frankly a bit surprised that you've even tried to defend the word here- it's not a phrase I would ever think the Drupal community would condone.

1) Last I knew, feeds and posts weren't people.
2) I didn't write the title; I just didn't think it was that bad to result in your temper tantrum and insults.
3) The title was written by someone who is not a native English speaker. Given that I, who is a native English speaker don't see the term as being that bad, it's quite possible that he didn't, either.
4) I really don't even know why I'm responding to this anymore. This is so far beyond ridiculous it isn't funny. Equating removing some posts from a feed to ethnic cleansing? Please.

Michelle

Based on comment #28 marking as wont fix. Things will remain status quo until better tools are made available. And I believe there are other issues regarding jquery out there. (#299884: Implement Aggregator Item Length module on Drupal.org)

The last part of this issue is just getting ridiculous.