> Yes, but that's a overkill for small work items. I would prefer raising a defect and leaving it open till someone picks.
Of course, that's what I was saying. It makes searching easier than commenting on random threads that happen to be open. Project board is for organizing the issues in some way, and I doubt we'll ever have some many items to need organization other than a plain listing under /issues, hence the adverb "ever" before "needed".
In the future if a TODO list is ever needed, we could use https://github.com/jarun/googler/projects instead. It's not 2015 anymore so issues don't need to be organized in a meta-issue.
My detailed thoughts on why googler isn't equipped to handle Google Scholar can be found here: https://github.com/jarun/googler/issues/209#issuecomment-482767587.
I'm looking to finally close this issue. Thoughts:
1. *google scholar search*
I checked it out, it doesn't fit into our model.
<img width="808" alt="scholar google com_scholar_hl=en as_sdt=0%2C5 q=ads-cft btnG=" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/4149852/56073045-b0a9a780-5dd0-11e9-99ab-312682b0241c.png">
Note the "[PDF] arxiv.org" link to the right. It's different from the primary link, but the primary link is often a paywalled journal link (to people without an institutional subscription) and most people would go for the arXiv link instead[1]. This is obviously field-specific, but when a secondary link is available, which is very welcome, googler isn't equipped to handle multiple links for a single entry.
In addition, the "cited by" count may be useful, but googler isn't equipped with a secondary metadata field either. Limiting date (year) range works completely differently, too.
So, in order to support a niche feature we need to devise an expanded schema, (!) an expanded control set, and a different year limiting syntax. Apparently not worth the trouble.
Finally, I personally use inspirehep.net instead of Google Scholar so the incentive for myself is even lower.
[1] To non-academic people or academic people not familiar with arXiv, it's a preprint server where math/physics/theoretical computer science etc. researchers post preprints/published manuscripts for open access. Anyone can access any paper for free. Traditional journals, controlled by goliaths like Elsevier, on the other hand, cost $$$. Either you or your institution has to pay for it, and like cable TV, content is often bundled, so your institution needs to pay for a lot of extra crap to get the good stuff. To make matters worse, bundle prices are usually negotiated behind closed doors and institutions has to sign NDAs on the pricing. See Tim Gowers's blog https://gowers.wordpress.com/category/elsevier/ on the evil practices and how mathematicians fought back.
2. *Support all options at omniprompt*
Not gonna happen. No one asked for it, it was always a completeness thing, and it's certainly not a "good first issue" kind of issue where you just accept someone else's patch right away.
I think the TODO list has served its purpose. Nothing actually happened (old item implemented, or new item added and implemented) here in the past two years. This issue could be closed instead of attracting more feature requests that make searching harder.
As I said, googler running in Ubuntu and googler running inside a python:3.6-slim container on top of Ubuntu should be sending the exact same requests with the exact same headers (user agent included) so not sure what "behavior" is different.
googler is of course worlds apart from a JavaScript-enabled browser. Think of reCAPTCHA v3 where there's only a single checkbox, and the amount of completely transparent bot detection that happens behind the scenes.