Please separate TouchGFX subforum

[waclawek.jan]

The topics discussed for TouchGFX are completely orthogonal to the STM32 related issues.

I'd also suggest to separate CubeMX/CubeIDE to separate subforum as issues tagged so are also in the vast majority of cases completely unrelated to STM32.

JW

[Tesla DeLorean]

I'd also like for things that have been marked correct/best/accepted to not bubble into my "Most Recent" view simply because someone has checked a box, if that's at all possible.

When I get up I have to mine 5 level deep to get actual new material.

@brk​ from the "Tiered Moderation" side, I'd like for Jan, I and others to be able to push topics into the right places.

[Brian Kling]

Marked Best Answers

Not sure we can modify this behavior, I'll have a look

Pushing Topics to "right" places

@Community member​ & @Community member​ you can already do this. By choosing an initial post in a conversation, you can select the down arrow on the right, "Edit Topics." If you remove a Topic, it will disappear from that Q&A feed page and conversely, if you add a Topic, the post will appear on that Q&A Topic page.

[waclawek.jan]

Okay, and can we have the separate STM32 mcus forum, then?

[Amel NASRI]

Hi Jan,

What do you mean by "separate TouchGFX subforum"?

It has already a dedicated subforum TouchGFX, the same for STM32CubeMX and STM32CubeIDE. All is based on topics (or tags).

Then, it is interesting for us to know with which product is the tool used.

If you mean not to list TouchGFX related questions for example under STM32 MCUs, this is another matter.

@Community member​ : +1 for your proposal regarding pushing topics into the right place ;)

-Amel

[Tesla DeLorean]

In the normal forum sense Jan is talking about a page/tab or whatever the mechanism is here, like STM32 MCU vs MPU, where specific stuff is partitioned into its own area or sub-forum and is less visible to those who are less interested into those topic areas. Secondarily, some ability for us to push stuff into those places

I think the personal HOME page typically just carries sub-forums you've "Followed" or otherwise subscribed too. This works well, except for when people accepting or liking stuff bubbles less relevant posts to the top.

[Brian Kling]

The Home page shouldn't reflect your own personal settings, but instead shows all updates from the Navigational Q&A Topics. For the more personalized feed of what you follow, try My Pages > What I Follow.

[waclawek.jan]

> If you mean not to list TouchGFX related questions for example under STM32 MCUs, this is another matter.

Yes, that's what I mean. No, that's not another matter, That's *the* matter, the STM32 MCUs *is* (or ought to be) a subforum, one of, if not *the*, most important, here.

ST sells chips, and those need support. Software is secondary and should not get into way of the hardware talks.

Better yet, drop force, get some decent forum software, and start fresh with thinking over the structure. We don't need "community" or any fancy stuff. We need a solid forum, fullstop.

JW

[Martin KJELDSEN]

I completely agree that something has to be done about "recent activity" and the way posts bubble up even when "insignificant" changes happen. I know that a new community platform is being discussed so now's definitely the time to give inputs and feedback.

> ST sells chips, and those need support. Software is secondary and should not get into way of the hardware talks.

While it's extremely important to be able to personalize the feeds on this platform i have to disagree with you on the priority of software, Jan. I know this is probably a very personal standpoint for you but I just wanted to share the other side of the story. ST doesn't just sell chips now and some customers rely on graphical frameworks like TouchGFX in order to realize their products. No software, no product. No hardware, no product. That being said, i completely agree that you shouldn't have to be exposed to those discussions if you're not interested in them.

I'm sure @brk​ will take your thoughts as valuable input =)

/Martin

[Brian Kling]

@Martin KJELDSEN​ when you say "I know that a new community platform is being discussed" this is incorrect. We are not migrating again to another platform. We are however working on a full UI/UX review to see how we can improve.

[waclawek.jan]

And that's a pity and waste of time, money, resources.

JW

[waclawek.jan]

> i have to disagree

Good. We need to discuss this over a pint or two of your favourite beverage =)

Nevertheless, part of the problem I am complaining here is you, Martin. Would you less eagerly support TouchGFX here, similarly to how rest of ST approaches support of the hardware aspects of STM32s - which you'll surely agree is a much wider topic - the problem would go away... ;)

Thanks for supporting my point.

Jan

[Martin KJELDSEN]

Deal ;) Slovakia isn't that far away from Denmark.

I'll try to be more concise on the TouchGFX subforum as not to clutter the main feed!

/Martin

[waclawek.jan]

> I'll try to be more concise on the TouchGFX subforum as not to clutter the main feed!

Please don't. It was just a joke.

Jan

[Martin KJELDSEN]

@Community member​, I know. I just felt i had to offer some form of instant remedy =) Something else i can do for now is improve at removing tags that are incorrect. E.g. there's no real point in tagging TouchGFX related posts with "STM32 MCUs". While the tag is appropriate, contextually, it is probably used inappropriately when it comes to the core contents of pure software related issues.

Sometimes it'll span wider, though, when it comes to DMA transfers, memory and general faults in which case i might leave the tags as is.

/Martin

[waclawek.jan]

> Something else i can do for now is improve at removing tags that are incorrect.

Thanks, but there's little effect from this work. E.g. for this particular purpose it's not much of a help - clicking on the STM32 MCUs tag does not produce a "pure" listing anyway.

> Sometimes it'll span wider [...]

Yes, of course.

JW