Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Apr 25, 2024. It is now read-only.

Feature: Progressive Web App #1020

Closed
abhisheknaiidu opened this issue Jun 16, 2020 · 3 comments
Closed

Feature: Progressive Web App #1020

abhisheknaiidu opened this issue Jun 16, 2020 · 3 comments
Labels
✨ goal: improvement Improvement to an existing feature 🚧 status: blocked Blocked & therefore, not ready for work 🙅 status: discontinued Not suitable for work as repo is in maintenance 🏷 status: label work required Needs proper labelling before it can be worked on ❓ talk: question Can be resolved with an answer

Comments

@abhisheknaiidu
Copy link
Contributor

Implement Progressive Web App for CC Search

We can make both mobile and web as a progressive app! (Add App to Home Screen)

  • Mobile Compatible

  • Desktop Compatible(If Needed)

Most of the apps nowadays are sunsetting their mobile web apps and going full PWA like:
DRIBBLE:

driible-pwa

TWITTER:

twitter-pwa

@kgodey
Copy link
Contributor

kgodey commented Jun 17, 2020

@abhisheknaiidu new features have to go through @annatuma for triage so I added "awaiting triage" back. Please talk with her directly and get her approval before removing the label.

@annatuma
Copy link

Thanks for the suggestion @abhisheknaiidu

While I agree that PWAs are nifty, and may be appropriate for some apps, I'm not convinced that this would be the right move for CC Search, and definitely not in the short term.

We'd need to start by doing user research to understand if there was even a need for this. Assuming there was, we'd need to look into what is feasible for us to load offline for users, while being cognizant of storage space, amongst other things. Further, it would likely require a different definition of the product entirely, since the goal of PWAs is typically to build engagement with the product, while we explicitly steer users through CC Search, treating it as a portal, and send them on to their destinations of sites containing CC licensed content.

That said, the scenario may change in time. I'm going to put this in the parking lot for now and mark it as blocked. That way, anyone with a similar idea can contribute to the discussion here.

@annatuma annatuma moved this from Pending Review to Parking Lot in Backlog Jun 18, 2020
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Sep 11, 2020

PWAs? Seems interesting

@kgodey kgodey added 🚧 status: blocked Blocked & therefore, not ready for work ✨ goal: improvement Improvement to an existing feature ❓ talk: question Can be resolved with an answer and removed blocked labels Sep 24, 2020
@zackkrida zackkrida mentioned this issue Oct 5, 2020
15 tasks
@cc-open-source-bot cc-open-source-bot added the 🏷 status: label work required Needs proper labelling before it can be worked on label Dec 2, 2020
@kgodey kgodey added this to [TEMPORARY] Deprioritize in Active Sprint Dec 2, 2020
@kgodey kgodey removed this from [TEMPORARY] Deprioritize in Active Sprint Dec 2, 2020
@kgodey kgodey added this to [TEMPORARY] Deprioritize in Active Sprint Dec 2, 2020
@kgodey kgodey removed this from [TEMPORARY] Deprioritize in Active Sprint Dec 2, 2020
@kgodey kgodey moved this from Parking Lot to CC Search in Backlog Dec 2, 2020
@kgodey kgodey added this to [TEMPORARY] Deprioritize in Active Sprint Dec 2, 2020
@kgodey kgodey removed this from [TEMPORARY] Deprioritize in Active Sprint Dec 2, 2020
@kgodey kgodey added the 🙅 status: discontinued Not suitable for work as repo is in maintenance label Dec 16, 2020
@kgodey kgodey closed this as completed Dec 16, 2020
@kgodey kgodey moved this from CC Search to Done in Backlog Dec 16, 2020
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
✨ goal: improvement Improvement to an existing feature 🚧 status: blocked Blocked & therefore, not ready for work 🙅 status: discontinued Not suitable for work as repo is in maintenance 🏷 status: label work required Needs proper labelling before it can be worked on ❓ talk: question Can be resolved with an answer
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants