Here's whats left to be done before I can take the site live. This is a call to action. Send me any new content or changes to existing content, you would like to see on the site.
- These empty pages need content. Some of the content can be pulled off the old pages, and moved to these new pages. + HowTo + Troubleshooting + Developer Hints + Sending Patches + Resources
- These pages need to be updated. Dimi, I think you did some of them. Are the ones I have the latest. + To Do Lists + Supported Applications List + FAQ
- These non-PHP pages need to be updated to the new design (after the update) The downside is they will not use the themes support. I may just give them a generic simple look. + Search Results Pages + Documentation
That's about it. Almost there!
On 21 Mar 2003, Jeremy Newman wrote:
- These empty pages need content. Some of the content can be pulled off
the old pages, and moved to these new pages.
- HowTo
- Troubleshooting
- Developer Hints
- Sending Patches
- Resources
I would add the following needed fixes: + Introduction : it's dry, and non inviting + License : too short, we should probably include the text directly + Download/Source: it seems ... incomplete. IMO we should collapse the two Download page into a single page. But where do we stick the menu item? In About? In Support? I suggest About. + Documentation: let's get that into PHP, so it behaves like the rest of the site... It's so annoying the way it jumps to a different layout, without menu, etc. + Forums: we should get rid of the "Other Mailing Lists" section, the lists are dead, they are confusing. We have already enough forums, more lists don't help. Instead, we should mention the newsgroups, and the IRC channels. + CVS: move the "Generating and Submitting Patches" to the "Sending Patches" page.
Long Term: + BugZilla: integrate inot the site, same theme, etc. + AppDB: ditto BTW, have you thought about it? What would it take?
- These pages need to be updated. Dimi, I think you did some of them.
Are the ones I have the latest.
- To Do Lists
- Supported Applications List
- FAQ
The FAQ is uptodate, the rest are not. However, I also need some CSS tags, where to they go?
- These non-PHP pages need to be updated to the new design (after the
update) The downside is they will not use the themes support. I may just give them a generic simple look.
- Search Results Pages
- Documentation
I'd really like if we can fix the Documentation page before we do the switch. Is there anything special about it?
Also, I am serious about the "Latest News" box. We need an agreement -- what about a patch implementing the idea, so people can have a more informed opinion?
On Fri, 2003-03-21 at 15:52, Dimitrie O. Paun wrote:
On 21 Mar 2003, Jeremy Newman wrote:
- These empty pages need content. Some of the content can be pulled off
the old pages, and moved to these new pages.
- HowTo
- Troubleshooting
- Developer Hints
- Sending Patches
- Resources
I would add the following needed fixes: + Introduction : it's dry, and non inviting
If someone has better text let me know. I'm basically using what was already there and tweaking it.
+ License : too short, we should probably include the text directly
No problem there. Can do.
+ Download/Source: it seems ... incomplete. IMO we should collapsethe two Download page into a single page. But where do we stick the menu item? In About? In Support? I suggest About.
I'm currently happy with the seperate pages. And I believe Francois was very adamant about having downloads be its own menu item. All the navigation I have so far is based off his suggestions in bugzilla. Although he wanted drop downs which I despise.
+ Documentation: let's get that into PHP, so it behaves likethe rest of the site... It's so annoying the way it jumps to a different layout, without menu, etc.
Currently the documentation is in SHTML. I do header and footer includes to get the layout it currently has. It could be possible to write a script to converty the docs to PHP. I'll mull over this one during the weekend. If anyone has any suggestions on how to do it let me know. Using an <iframe> is out for compatibility reasons.
+ Forums: we should get rid of the "Other Mailing Lists" section,the lists are dead, they are confusing. We have already enough forums, more lists don't help. Instead, we should mention the newsgroups, and the IRC channels.
No prob.
+ CVS: move the "Generating and Submitting Patches" to the"Sending Patches" page.
Already done.
Long Term: + BugZilla: integrate inot the site, same theme, etc. + AppDB: ditto BTW, have you thought about it? What would it take?
The AppDB was written by Charles and I. I want to convert the AppDB to plugin to the WineHQ site. It is not a trivial amount of work.
Ugh, Bugzilla. I hate touching the code in Bugzilla. I really need to upgrade us to the latest version that supports templates. Then I could possibly do something with it. Another problem is that bugzilla is written in Perl, so I would need to rewrite my libs to work with it. The other option is to drop bugzilla and go with PHP BugTracker http://phpbt.sourceforge.net/.
- These pages need to be updated. Dimi, I think you did some of them.
Are the ones I have the latest.
- To Do Lists
- Supported Applications List
- FAQ
The FAQ is uptodate, the rest are not. However, I also need some CSS tags, where to they go?
You can insert them into the same page if you want, just do <style type=text/css> .foo { color: chartruce; } </style> This way they aren't globally included accross the entire site. Look at the Status page for an example
- These non-PHP pages need to be updated to the new design (after the
update) The downside is they will not use the themes support. I may just give them a generic simple look.
- Search Results Pages
- Documentation
I'd really like if we can fix the Documentation page before we do the switch. Is there anything special about it?
Talked about that above.
Also, I am serious about the "Latest News" box. We need an agreement -- what about a patch implementing the idea, so people can have a more informed opinion?
I have already implemented one in another site I have done at http://scummvm.sf.net/. I could implement something similar here. But, so far you are the only one being vocal about it. Jeremy and I have the same opinion, it's unnecessary duplication. So maybe a few more opinions are needed to close this issue. I know it seems cool at first, but I hate going to sites where the news on the front page of the site is months old. It simply looks bad. As long as Brian is being consistent with WWN (one per week), lets not water down his efforts with duplicate news.
[I am replying in a separate message for each of the issues for sanity's sake]
On March 21, 2003 06:31 pm, Jeremy Newman wrote:
+ Introduction : it's dry, and non invitingIf someone has better text let me know. I'm basically using what was already there and tweaking it.
Here are my suggestions: o The big glass does not work right in Kongy, needs fixing o We need to start the page with a nice little story, not a dry list. o The itemized list of features should be moved to a separate page, "Features", linked to from a new menu item in the "About" box o Nuke the "Legal" section, we already have a page for it. o No need for the itemized list in the "Wine Status" section. I'd just get rid of it, we have a link to the status from the main menu, and the links to the ChangeLogs have no business there. o There is no need to have separate sections for History/Wine Status/Contact. This is "Introduction", people expect a nice story for it. These three sections should just be put together in a nice flowy story. As they are small, just concatenating their content would do, it's just the Contact one that's a bit telegraphic.
Here is my suggestion for the contents:
The Wine project started in 1993 as a way to support running Windows 3.1 programs on Linux. Bob Amstadt was the original coordinator, but turned it over fairly early on to Alexandre Julliard, who has run it ever since. Over the years, ports for other Unixes have been added, along with support for Win32 as Win32 applications became popular.
Wine is still under development, and it is not yet suitable for general use. Nevertheless, many people find it useful in running a growing number of Windows programs. Please see the [Application Database] for success and failure reports for hundreds of Windows programs, as well as the [Bug Tracking Database] for a list of known issues, and the [Status] page for a global view on Wine's implementation progress.
A broad spectrum of Wine developers can be reached in the [Wine forums]. Comments about the winehq.com website can be emailed to web-admin@winehq.com. Alexandre Julliard leads the Wine project, and may be reached by email at julliard@winehq.com. For a list of current developers, see the Wine Who's Who.
On Sat, 2003-03-22 at 01:49, Dimitrie O. Paun wrote:
Here are my suggestions: o The big glass does not work right in Kongy, needs fixing
Fixed, Konq was not understanding just what align=right means. Why it did not like to align right of another image (the grey line) is beyond me ATM.
o We need to start the page with a nice little story, not a dry list. o The itemized list of features should be moved to a separate page, "Features", linked to from a new menu item in the "About" box o Nuke the "Legal" section, we already have a page for it. o No need for the itemized list in the "Wine Status" section. I'd just get rid of it, we have a link to the status from the main menu, and the links to the ChangeLogs have no business there. o There is no need to have separate sections for History/Wine Status/Contact. This is "Introduction", people expect a nice story for it. These three sections should just be put together in a nice flowy story. As they are small, just concatenating their content would do, it's just the Contact one that's a bit telegraphic.
Agreed. :-)
On March 21, 2003 06:31 pm, Jeremy Newman wrote:
+ Download/Source: it seems ... incomplete. IMO we should collapse the two Download page into a single page. But where do we stick the menu item? In About? In Support? I suggest About.I'm currently happy with the seperate pages. And I believe Francois was very adamant about having downloads be its own menu item. All the navigation I have so far is based off his suggestions in bugzilla. Although he wanted drop downs which I despise.
Well, the design is great, and I like it, but that does not mean we can not tweak it once we see how it looks. I've ask around, and the Source page does look empty. Why have it? It has one link to ibiblio... It's confusing, as the SF page we point people to from Binaries also contains sources, as it should.
Bottom line is, it's silly to force the content to two pages, just to justify a different menu box. (BTW, I've noticed that you've made the title of the menu boxes unclickable, thank you! I wanted to ask you to do so, you beat me to the punch :) ).
What I suggest is that in the main download page, under the "Official Wine Versions" we list the four sources which appear in the ANNOUNCEMENT: http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/Linux/ALPHA/wine/development ftp://ftp.infomagic.com/pub/mirrors/linux/sunsite/ALPHA/wine/development ftp://ftp.fu-berlin.de/unix/linux/mirrors/sunsite.unc.edu/ALPHA/wine/development ftp://orcus.progsoc.uts.edu.au/pub/Wine/development The "System" column should just say "Source". Personally, I don't know why we need to list all these mirrors. SF provides for mirrors, etc. Alexandre, what about if we list just the ibibilo link?
Or even better, provide a "Source Mirrors" list at the end of the page, so we don't clutter the important stuff with all this.
There are other problems on the main Download page:
-- The big warning must go: By downloading one of the binary packages given below, you acknowledge that the Wine devel team has absolutely no responsibility and authority on these packages. The packagers frequently even fail to follow the Wine Packaging Guide instructions, resulting in highly reduced functionality. In short: if you want to make sure that your Wine config is done as outlined (thus gaining pretty good compatibility), then use the Wine source and read the documentation very carefully.
What's the point in providing these packages in the first place if the first thing we say is this?!? Let's just kill it.
-- The "Dataparty" entry has a "Currently glibc-2.2.2." note which is redundant, as it's stated in the "System" column.
-- The "Daily Debian Wine" entry has installation instructions in the Description column. They uglify the page, I think they belong on Andreas's site.
On March 21, 2003 06:31 pm, Jeremy Newman wrote:
+ Documentation: let's get that into PHP, so it behaves like the rest of the site... It's so annoying the way it jumps to a different layout, without menu, etc.Currently the documentation is in SHTML. I do header and footer includes to get the layout it currently has. It could be possible to write a script to converty the docs to PHP. I'll mull over this one during the weekend. If anyone has any suggestions on how to do it let me know. Using an <iframe> is out for compatibility reasons.
I understand that getting all the docs in the right format is non-trivial. I would be happy if we get just the main page (http://www.winehq.com/Docs/) listing the Guides in the right format for now. It's easier to swallow a format shift of this magnitude when you go read a book, but for a summary page not different from any other it's a lot more surprising.
On March 21, 2003 06:31 pm, Jeremy Newman wrote:
I have already implemented one in another site I have done at http://scummvm.sf.net/. I could implement something similar here. But,
Yes!!! This is exactly what I had in mind!
so far you are the only one being vocal about it. Jeremy and I have the same opinion, it's unnecessary duplication. So maybe a few more opinions are needed to close this issue.
What I don't understand is why you guys maintain that opinion. I have argued several times it's not duplicated, and I've never received a response to my arguments :(. Now, I might not be the greatest communicator, but I've reread what I wrote and it didn't seem that bad :)
I will try to argue the point one more time in my reply to Jer, so I will refer you to that post.
I know it seems cool at first, but I hate going to sites where the news on the front page of the site is months old. It simply looks bad.
I wholeheartedly agree that an unmaintained "Latest News" looks bad. Very bad. But we are in no such danger: we have regular WWN releases, Wine releases, product releases from Codeweavers and Transgaming, various articles in the press, calls for action, fund raising campains, exciting user level things (e.g. Access works! games XXX works, etc), and so on, and so forth. These are all news that people want to find out near real time, not wait for a synthesis magazine that appears weekly.
For example, I go every night to www.kde.org and www.gnome.org to read their "Latest News" headlines. We have enough of these to get people to check out the site on a regular basis, just like they do with LWN. Remember, LWN started as a weekly publication, but the Slashdot-like, daily updated thing took over soon -- people just like to read headlines when they happen. This is bound to increase interest and traffic for the site which is what you want, I just can't understand why you guys are so opposed to the idea.
-
Dimitrie O. Paun -
Dimitrie O. Paun -
Jeremy Newman