SirCmpwn

Yes, I will probably add that back in (but not immediately).

Redesigned the mod listing page: http://beta.kerbalstuff.com/mod/16

Thanks for the detailed feedback! I'll see if I can respond to all of it. 1: Do you like the background now? I think I've settled on this one. 2: Admins are able to edit/delete mods as if they were the owners of the mods. If this is abused, I might change it. There is partial support for requiring modders to have their first couple of mods manually approved, I might turn that on if need be. 3: This should be consistent now. 4: I kind of like how it behaves now. Nice and simple, no BS. 5: I agree, but I'll sort this out later. 6: The navigation bar is pretty much going away, so I don't think this is entirely relevant any more. 7: The minimalism is indeed something I wanted. The reasoning behind allowing private profiles is so that users could use the site to subscribe to mods and such without showing up publicly. 8: This is totally broken as a side effect of the redesign, I'll fix it soon. 9: You can leave comments anonymously or with just a name. This was just an easy way to get comments for blog posts. Might change it at some point. Feature suggestions: 1: I think this would be a good application for a third party site to build 2: Still unsure about that, but I am considering it. It seems like many modders are against it and they're the most important ones to please. 3: No, comments are intentionally left out.

The animation just adds a little extra interactivity is all. Regarding the "offset to the right", I don't think it's a huge deal. People will learn about it and upload images accordingly.

I've heard your feedback on the design, and I sat down with a friend of mine who does design for a living. We went over the site and I heard his suggestions, and I feel more confident about the visual direction I can take this. I've started working on redesigning it, you can see the progress here: http://beta.kerbalstuff.com/

Yes, that's planned.

I hope to feature cool/new mods on the front page, which would ideally get them some traction. I'm not a huge fan of having a part of the site dedicated to "the worst mods".

It's currently hosted by Majiir, on beefy servers that can easily endure the load.

I focused on functionality before aesthetic, which is something I strongly encourage developers to do. I'm very open to hearing suggestions on the style, though, now that most of the functionality is in place.

Thanks for your support!

I'll think about it. Longer descriptions are easily readable on featured mods, so I'm not sure about making it shorter.

I would appreciate those things, thanks. Would make my life easier if I don't have to write those from scratch. Regarding scrolling, I'll see what I can do. Regarding craft repository, I'm not sure if that's a good idea, but I'll think about it.

Thanks, I'm glad you like it!

Yes, I mentioned the near-future plans in the original post.

Can you PM me your email address? I'll see if I can find which black hole your registration email disappeared into.

Hmm, I don't see any errors logged. Did you get the confirmation email? You might have gotten bitten by a recent deployment, the site hiccups for a second whenever I push code. I'm not sure I understand. You complain that 3-12 characters is too restrictive, so I bump it to 3-24 characters, and you're still not happy with it?

Bumped to 24.

Kerbal Stuff is a new community-run website for modders to distribute their mods on. It's open source (Python+Flask, with PostgreSQL for persistence) and on GitHub. Pull requests are welcome. Use this thread for feedback, bug reports, feature requests, or whatever else you want to talk about. [Mod Edit: Domain now points to something dodgy ]

Blog implemented, too. I don't consider the site quite ready to bring into public beta, so read that post with a grain of salt. It's mostly to demonstrate that the blog works.

Added a pretty about page and added the ability for admins to feature mods on the home page.

I can do that (and probably will), but what you can't tell from the screenshot is that as you start typing versions, it autocompletes them for you. Video

Implemented search. You can see it in action at [Link removed by moderator: original site defunct, now taken over by malware] . I ended up going with this ranking algorithm: def weigh_result(result): # Factors considered, * indicates important factors: # High followers and high downloads get bumped* # Mods with a long version history get bumped # Mods with lots of screenshots or videos get bumped # Mods with a short description get docked # Mods lose points the longer they go without updates* # Mods get points for supporting the latest KSP version # Mods get points for being open source # New mods are given a hefty bonus to avoid drowning among established mods score = result.follower_count * 10 score += result.download_count score += len(result.versions) / 5 score += len(result.media) if len(result.description) < 100: score -= 10 if result.updated: delta = (result.updated - datetime.now()).days if delta > 100: delta = 100 # Don't penalize for oldness past a certain point score -= delta / 5 if len(result.versions) > 0: if result.versions[0].ksp_version == _cfg("latest-ksp"): score += 50 if result.source_link: score += 10 if (result.created - datetime.now()).days < 30: score += 100 return score def search_mods(text, page): terms = text.split(' ') query = db.query(Mod).join(Mod.user) filters = list() for term in terms: filters.append(Mod.name.ilike('%' + term + '%')) filters.append(User.username.ilike('%' + term + '%')) filters.append(Mod.description.ilike('%' + term + '%')) filters.append(Mod.short_description.ilike('%' + term + '%')) query = query.filter(or_(*filters)) query = query.filter(Mod.published == True) query = query.order_by(desc(Mod.follower_count)) # We'll do a more sophisticated narrowing down of this in a moment query = query.limit(100) results = sorted(query.all(), key=weigh_result) return results[page * 10:page * 10 + 10] Basically, it starts with a broad search to find published mods with the search terms in the title, description, short description, or author name, and orders this by the follower count. Once it has that, it scores them based on: Follower count Download count Length of version history Number of screenshots/videos Detail of descriptions Most recently updated Support for the latest KSP version Open source gives you a boost Being a new mod gives you a boost Not all of these factors are given equal weight, but it should give a reasonable ranking. I'll tweak it over time to make it give the best results.

What if a mod is <1 month old, then I can give it a hefty bump just to increase exposure?

I know SpacePort's search was pretty hated, so I've made an effort to do better than that. I've set up some rules by which search results are weighted, how does this look? def weigh_result(result): # Factors considered, * indicates important factors: # High followers and high downloads get bumped* # Mods with a long version history get bumped # Mods with lots of screenshots or videos get bumped # Mods with a short description get docked # Mods lose points the longer they go without updates* # Mods get points for supporting the latest KSP version # Mods get points for being open source score = result.follower_count * 10 score += result.download_count score += len(result.versions) / 5 score += len(result.media) if len(result.description) < 100: score -= 10 if result.updated: delta = (result.updated - datetime.now()).days if delta > 100: delta = 100 # Don't penalize for oldness past a certain point score -= delta / 5 if len(result.versions) > 0: if result.versions[0].ksp_version == _cfg("latest-ksp"): score += 50 if result.source_link: score += 10 return score Results that have higher followers and downloads, a longer version history, lots of screenshots/videos, support for the latest version for KSP, and are open source are given a higher score. Points are lost for going too long without updating your mod, or for having a short description.