Migrating the BoneJ User and Developer Group

This forum looks pretty neat and with our new engineer starting soon we will consider moving the BoneJ user and developer form from Google Groups to here. Would that be welcome?

Only issue is, how to create a tag? I see ‘choose optional tags for this topic’, but it seems like if I type a new tag (e.g. ‘BoneJ’), I am not allowed to do so.

Michael

Hi @mdoube!

Hmm… I just added a BoneJ tag to this post and noticed it shows up in the edit history. I wonder if you need a certain trust level before the forum allows you to edit…? I’ll dig around the admin settings and see if I can figure it out.

90% confirmed: you need your “Trust level” to be 1 or higher right now to edit, which I suspect means level 1 or higher to add tags.

Since you can post new topics at level 0 it may make sense to allow level 0’s to edit… what do other people think?

  • Let trust level 0 edit posts
  • Keep it as-is: users need trust level 1 to edit

0 voters

If we keep it as-is we will need to put an entry about tagging in the FAQ, and also give users some feedback about how to obtain level 1 trust (and maybe lower those requirements).

We can also discuss this on the tagging plugin GitHub issues page.

Having BoneJ discussion here would be fantastic. This is exactly what we would like to achieve with the forum via tags, etc.: extensibility! :smile:

@mdoube I made you a Level 4 leader and moderator, so you can configure the forum to your liking for the purposes of integrating the BoneJ project.

1 Like

Result! Thanks @ctrueden and @hinerm. We’ll have a poke around and look at how best to integrate the communities.

Looks like in my preferences I can choose to be notified of messages by Category but not by Tag. Is this something that could be included? I would be especially interested to be emailed with BoneJ-related forum messages, but not so much the other chatter.

Shoot, that’s unfortunate. Discourse is still very new so hopefully they will add that in a future version of the tagging plugin. You could certainly ask on Discourse Meta whether it is possible, and if not, how one might go about adding that feature. I’m sure they welcome pull requests. :smile:

As a stopgap, we could make a BoneJ category. Would that suffice?

A BoneJ category would be OK for now, but I think a tag would be better longer term. I wonder whether a general strategy would be worth deciding on already for the bigger plugin projects, so that users of those plugins can be kept informed of important plugin-specific news.

Agreed. Would you care to ask about it on Discourse Meta? I’d like to know if it’s a planned feature for the tagging plugin (or even if it’s already possible somehow).

I worked it out: just go to the tag’s page, e.g. http://forum.image.sc/tags/bonej then click on the circle menu on the right and select to watch the tag.

2 Likes

Awesome! So glad to hear this is possible. Great that we won’t need a dedicated category.

In case Google decides to shut down Groups completely (like Microsoft did with their group thing years ago), it would be prudent to back up all the material here. That might also help with migrating the user base and directing search results here rather than a dead place. I see that there is a scraping approach that has been used in the past to get Google Groups data into Discourse.

https://meta.discourse.org/t/import-from-google-groups-to-discourse/7307/15

This could be handy for the BoneJ group and also the closed Fiji group https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/fiji-users

Is this something that @rimadoma and I would have sufficient privilege levels to achieve?

1 Like

There are actually two closed Fiji groups: fiji-users and fiji-devel. If we migrated one, I’d migrate both.

I have reservations about attempting such an import, which would generate a massive influx of old topics, for (IMHO) very little benefit.

But if you really think it is a good idea, and worth the extra effort, I would be happy to send you a backup of the Discourse forum, which you could set up on your own internal server, then attempt the import(s). Once you are confident everything works well without undesirable side effects, we could redo the import on the live instance.

That’s a sensible first point to define - what is the benefit of importing the conversations, besides simply archiving everything? Perhaps a better approach would be to pick through the topics and generate themes for Wiki documentation items, so that the old discussions seed starting points for more formal articles. We are planning to overhaul BoneJ’s documentation anyway as part of @rimadoma’s project.

Sounds good!

It will save a lot of time not to migrate the old content. You can still backup/archive it of course, and if Google Groups ever disappears reinstate the content at that point.