# Rubyforge web page search engine features **URL:** \ **Category:** Ruby\ **Created:** [August 12, 2008, 5:57am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/rubyforge-web-page-search-engine-features/145618 "2008-08-12T05:57:31Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 4\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![emmanueloga](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/e/ecae2f/32.png) [@emmanueloga](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/emmanueloga)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2008, 5:57am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/rubyforge-web-page-search-engine-features/145618/1 "2008-08-12T05:57:31Z")
People: I can’t tell you how much I appreciate the significance of [http://rubyforge.org](http://rubyforge.org) site. I’m very grateful to the kind people maintaining it. I have one concern, though… have you tried the search feature of the site? It does not return very significant results. For example, I searched “state machine” under software/groups category and a whole lot (and I _mean_ a lot!) of non-relevant results appeared (try it if you don’t believe me :). Is there anything I can do to improve this? I’m not sure of what’s the software powering rubyforge’s. I have not much knowledge about search engines, but I have successfully implemented the search feature in a couple of rails applications using ferret and ultrasphinx, so I know this could work a little better. But! I have the suspect that a non-ruby application is powering rubyforge right now… after looking around for a while I haven’t found which software is running rubyforge. Is it opensource? Can we help improving it? Maybe this could be better implemented using a document-oriented database approach, I’m not sure about this subject though as I have never implemented such a system. [http://rddb.rubyforge.org/](http://rddb.rubyforge.org/) [http://incubator.apache.org/couchdb/](http://incubator.apache.org/couchdb/) ---
**Author:** ![emmanueloga](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/e/ecae2f/32.png) [@emmanueloga](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/emmanueloga)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2008, 1:32pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/rubyforge-web-page-search-engine-features/145618/2 "2008-08-12T13:32:34Z")
On Aug 11, 2008, at 11:55 PM, Emmanuel O. wrote: > (and I _mean_ a lot!) of non-relevant results appeared (try it if you > found > which software is running rubyforge. Is it opensource? Can we help > improving it? Yup, it’s GForge - [http://gforge.org/](http://gforge.org/) - and I think it’s basically using the SQL LIKE keyword to drive the searches 🙂 . There have been some discussions about moving away from GForge, but migrating the current data is a bit of a sticky wicket. To be fair to GForge, we’re using a rather old version of it - the newer versions are probably better. Yours, Tom ---
**Author:** ![emmanueloga](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/e/ecae2f/32.png) [@emmanueloga](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/emmanueloga)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2008, 4:51pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/rubyforge-web-page-search-engine-features/145618/3 "2008-08-12T16:51:57Z")
Tom C. wrote: > Yup, it’s GForge - [http://gforge.org/](http://gforge.org/) - and I think it’s basically > using the SQL LIKE keyword to drive the searches 🙂 . There have > been some discussions about moving away from GForge, but migrating the > current data is a bit of a sticky wicket. To be fair to GForge, we’re > using a rather old version of it - the newer versions are probably > better. Ah! probably php… 🙂 Is there any ruby alternative suitable for the job? If not, is there any way we could help to make the update to a newer gforge version happen? ---
**Author:** ![emmanueloga](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/e/ecae2f/32.png) [@emmanueloga](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/emmanueloga)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2008, 5:04pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/rubyforge-web-page-search-engine-features/145618/4 "2008-08-12T17:04:03Z")
On Aug 12, 2008, at 10:49 AM, Emmanuel O. wrote: > Ah! probably php… 🙂 > Right on, yup, it’s in PHP. > Is there any ruby alternative suitable for the > job? redmine seems to be the leader at the moment. But the sticky bit is moving the data over, I think… > If not, is there any way we could help to make the update to a > newer gforge version happen? I just need to set aside some time to try it out. Doing a GForge upgrade involves running a lot of migrations (more or less), so I want to make sure nothing breaks horribly… Yours, Tom