Re: Status of web redesign?

Thanks for the update!

On Fri, Dec 30, 2016, 5:34 PM Dan Roberts <[email protected]> wrote:

> Unfortunately I didn't find much time between work and three different sets
> of family, but I believe I can carve out time this weekend. I expect a very
> low key new years. I have a prospective solution to my biggest pelican
> concern that I'm very happy with, I'll try to update again this weekend.
>
> Thanks,
> Dan
>
> On Dec 25, 2016 3:24 PM, "Ian Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Thanks for the update Dan, merry xmas.
> >
> > Ian Clarke
> > Founder, The Freenet Project
> > Email: [email protected]
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Dec 25, 2016 5:02 PM, Dan Roberts [email protected] wrote:
> >
> >> I'm trying to find some time to fully exercise the parts of pelican we
> >> need. I still have some concerns and issues I ran into last weekend in
> my
> >> initial exploration, but I'm hopeful they're not showstoppers.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Dan
> >>
> >> On Dec 23, 2016 11:34 AM, "Ian Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hey guys, this conversation seems to have died.
> >>
> >> Florent/Dan, are you guys on the same page about how we should proceed?
> >>
> >> Ian.
> >>
> >> Ian Clarke
> >> Founder, The Freenet Project
> >> Email: [email protected]
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sat, Dec 17, 2016 5:09 PM, Ian Clarke [email protected] wrote:
> >>
> >> On Sat, Dec 17, 2016 4:18 PM, Florent Daigniere
> >> [email protected] wrote:
> >>
> >> On Sat, 2016-12-17 at 10:44 -0800, Dan Roberts wrote:
> >>
> >> > It is my impression that retaining our transifex translations is a
> >>
> >> > requirement.
> >>
> >>
> >> I don't think so (we are supposed to re-write/de-clutter the content!);
> >>
> >>
> >> I agree, I the content on the main website must be simplified
> >> dramatically relative to what we have now, focussing on the needs of
> those
> >> interested in downloading and using Freenet, and donating to the
> project.
> >> This is a commonly used approach for consumer-facing open source
> software
> >> (eg. https://getfirefox.com/), and I think we should emulate it.
> >>
> >> "Deeper" content, more relevant to researchers, or developers, should be
> >> migrated to a separate wiki (perhaps hosted on Github) - although as an
> >> interim measure we can keep the old site around on a different URL.  Of
> >> course we will provide links to it where appropriate from the main site
> so
> >> it is findable.
> >>
> >> The perfect shouldn't be the enemy of the good.  My inclination is to
> get
> >> the new site up ASAP, translations and content can catch up (and will be
> >> much easier with a simplified website).  I think with a website that
> looks
> >> really good it will also be a good motivator for people to contribute to
> >> improve it.
> >>
> >> From a devops perspective, I think an ideal situation would be to have a
> >> limited number of people that can merge pull-requests for the site (but
> not
> >> so limited that it proves to be a bottleneck), and then a merge to
> master
> >> results in an automatic roll-out of the improved site.
> >>
> >> Ian.
> >>
> >> Ian Clarke
> >> Founder, The Freenet Project
> >> Email: [email protected]
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Ian Clarke
> >> Founder, The Freenet Project
> >> Email: [email protected]
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Ian Clarke
> > Founder, The Freenet Project
> > Email: [email protected]
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Devl mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
[email protected]
https://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl