add-on listing

Thanks all for working on the new site...awesome work.

However the add-on listing

is completely useless.

The hand-crafted listing of add-ons is completely biased and incomplete.

The link to Plone 5 compatible add-ons

is not helpful.

The full package listing

also includes many Plone core packages (which are not add-ons).

Though..not much improvement fact: the situation with the add-on listing became worse compared to the old
duplicated stuff on vs. PyPI.


I think it's the best compromise. No one updated the listing on the old Developers don't want to maintain 2 locations.

Having a open for PRs and improvements is the most manageable way to do it IMO so I'm glad they are going this route.

The list will get better, more developed over time.

Maybe a simple disclaimer that users can freely search the full list of add-ons on would help new users as well.

The old was wasn't being sustained. This new way might miss some add-ons which people will need to dig for but at least we have some curation.

Great job team!

1 Like

Pypi has a valid qualifier Environment :: Plugins
Using this as an additional filter would be a fast way to get rid of plone core packages.
Of course, we would have to add the qualifier to addons first.

Semi related, pypi search is broken anyway.
My collective.argv0spy package is one of many packages not findable.

1 Like

At least my own add-ons don't use the qualifer...metadata is usually incomplete and badly maintained.

Perhaps it would help fetching the related package list through the PyPI API and blacklist at least the core plone packages . An autogenerated listing under control would be more useful...perhaps with some faceted
navigiation to filter by Plone 4, Plone 5 or whatever might be useful. Perhaps the new PyPI implementation is more useful here or at least from the API point of view...I volunteer to help here.


The new Python "warehouse" has a nice faceted search UI (e.g. for Plone 5 packages):

..however also not so useful if you have to click through a bunch of pages.


Yes, none of the packages use it. But if we only show packages that use that qualifier, there would be an incentive. I prefer that over a blacklist for core packages.

all of this was already discussed here: Paragon vs ploneawesome

I gave some ideas on what to do here: Paragon vs ploneawesome

I can do some voluntary work on add-on evaluation if needed.

Thanks everyone. Yes, we knew we were launching with a half-assed best-we-could-do add-ons story, but at least now we have something to move forward with, as opposed to delaying

@zopyx please file an issue with prototyped pages/code that you think would work better for querying pypi and we can carry on the discussion there in a more directed way.

@hvelarde had a good idea to categorize the hand-made list of add-ons, though instead of by vertical we could use by function.

I was remembering yesterday that we tried in Bucharest to sprint on updating add-ons to P5, but we only got so far. Part of a series of "update for P5" sprints should be a big push to update the metadata for add-ons.

Last week I got a tour of the Odoo add-ons page... I like how it works and wish we could do something similar for Plone.

is indeed nice.

The problem with the "documentation" of Plone add-ons:

  • focused on developers, not end-users
  • no screenshots, poor screenshots
  • developer focused documentation, little information for end-users
  • redundant information (the xxxx-th (broken) explanation how to install an add-on on Plone)


These are all good points, and I agree (maybe that's the same thing :wink: ) The other thing that's nice there is that people can also sell their add-ons. I can imagine if we ran this sort of service we could even take a small fee that would support the Foundation...

There would be clear incentives for add-on authors to provide good screen shots and a selling use case description for end users or site owners, and we could standardize what shows up there. A Plone add-on marketplace.

Hi all ... just getting back into the swing of things after successfully upgrading buldout.cfg from 4.3.6 to 4.3.9 - When I went to look for the ol' addon page found it missing as described here.

Using the new regime with Pypi I have to use to get
Development Status :: 5 - Production/Stable
Framework :: Plone
Framework :: Plone :: 4.3
Total = 82
As a learning curve I will see what can teach myself (to share) where I as an end-user am happy

Still enjoying the camaraderie that I find here ... Best wishes

1 Like

I dont think it is possible to 'sell' add-ons, not even themes.

That said:
If it is difficult to find add-ons, they 'do not really exist'.
That must be easy to find and they need screenshot (and a demo would be nice, too).

Is it really that hard to add this to Plone,org ?
Could it be possible to 'add the product' to Plone, and the releases to Pypi.
In other words: First time one add an add on, you add it to and Pypi, the releases are just added to PYPI.

Well, with thinking like that... :slight_smile:

I've bought several themes from That marketplace exists :slight_smile:

It's perhaps a circular thing... if we don't do something quite radically different, nothing will change, ergo, we have to do something radically different (for the add-ons page). Having a space where people can showcase their add-ons beautifully and perhaps can get a bit of money from sales is going to be incentive for them to describe their add-ons well, with screen shots, and will encourage them to maintain the information.

I don't think we want to go back to having to list add-ons in two places ( and pypi). That was clearly not viable, as almost no one was keeping the version or info up to date (guilty as charged).


those themes have a market, but a Plone theme has a much smaller market (and is more complex to make ( it is 'those last 20%' that takes 80% of the time :frowning: )

About the version to be updated: I dont think that is too important. The main focus should to make it possible to let users (especially the 'new') to know about the add-ons that exists.
This is not always easy, sometimes people make almost the same product because they did not know that a similar already existed. ( I just made a flexbox slider portlet, just to discover that it had already been made .... )

How about letting developers (or others) maintain a single marketing page where they can upload screenshots and write human readable information about the add-on. We can also if we want display all the release related info etc from pypi?

The marketing page should be that... to explain briefly and entice. Could link to a secondary page with details (how is that different from the pypi page for each add-on?), but the problem we need to solve is: how to enforce maintenance of the content?

To be honest I don't find too difficult to maintain a dedicated page for a small set of add-ons... After all I think we are talking about 20, 30 add-ons, isn't it?

1 Like

Yes that's why we have that page there, but I was responding to @martior's question about displaying all release related info from pypi.

The Pyramid add-ons view is nice too.

OK there we go .....

First of all I want to thank you all the people how are working hard on, awesome works, thank you a lot !!!!

About the situation with:

I took the time and actually did some testing with people who I consider the main audience for this part of the site.
To say this again I do not consider core-devs and/or expired 'hardcore' user the main audience, these people usually know where and how to look for add-ons.

IMHO we lost it right in the beginning, because we are mainly focused on the 'cool technical integration' of pypi identifiers or other technical ways.

Do not get me wrong this is awesome !!! But as we found out really fast we are not at this point yet, and sorry adding a 'pypi search query' will work for devs but not for the main audience... :slight_smile:

@tkimnguyen started with which is a step but still in my opinion giving a wrong signal.

So yes I took the time and asked some user, and both of them we not really sold on what we have currently on because it was not working at all for them, they 'just' want something looking easy and nice where they are able to search and filter versions.


So maybe we have to approach that whole thing differently, yes maybe not that technical fancy, but at least something what works for our audience, till someone has the time to write a technical 'kick-ass' solution?

Yes that could mean we have to some work twice, but at least we do not loose user, once they moved away it is usually really hard to convince them to come back.

So what is if we lets say, skip the fancy stuff for now and give the something what is based on a custom dx type in combination with isotope ?

Yeah not that fancy and some extra work, btw we have to maintain from hand too but at least it looks good and people are able to find stuff ! :slight_smile:

1 Like