On Sat, Aug 12, 2023 at 06:23:07PM +0200, Wolfgang Pfeiffer wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 11, 2023 at 10:38:46PM -0400, Amelia A Lewis wrote: > > On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 20:11:02 -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote: > > > When did it become an assumption that we would adopt any of these > > > changes? > > > > I don't think that it did become an assumption, but as a number of > > people have responded to the initial design, to the point that the > > designer offered a revision, I thought I might add to the discussion. I > > apologize if it was out place to do so. > > The debate - since three days now - strongly suggests, that at least > some of those contributing to the debate were assuming that a change > of the looks of openbsd.org might be accepted. Otherwise: what sense > would it make to debate it here? > > The point tho seems: there were at least two threads over the last 11 > years on that topic: > > 2012: > "OpenBSD's webpage desing" > https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&w=2&r=4&s=desing+webpage&q=b > > 2016: > "Suggestion: new webpage for openbsd.org" > https://marc.info/?t=146346950300003&r=2&w=2 > > Result: > Just compare the archived version of the site from 2011 to the > present one: > https://web.archive.org/web/20111223000626/http://www.openbsd.org/ > > So to make sure my effort is making sense: what I most certainly would > have done before working on a redesign of the current page would have > been to ask its maintainers, whether they wanted the change. And if > yes: what sort of change. Because obviously it's, well: their page. > Not mine. Plus: they probably have specific needs that I don't know > about for the coding of it, to make it compatible with the frequent > changes of it: updates, announcement of patches etc. - Meaning: Before > doing any attempt to rewrite the code, I would have asked the > current maintainers about the constraints for a change. > > Theo de Raadt about a rewrite of openbsd.org in 2016: > > ---------------------------------- > https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=146378604413389&w=2 > > "We rarely do whole-scale replacements of anything in OpenBSD, unless > there is compelling reason the old should be discarded. I have > probably received 500+ proposals for website rewrites, a handful with > the effort already expended. This is another offer which will be > rejected. It is kind of sad. > > I think the site is fine. [ ... ] I agree there would be value in > small tweaks to improve the view for narrow displays. > > This is a project that does rapid incremental changes. This entire > concept of throw-it-away, you-want-the-new-warts; I don't get where > it comes from." > > ---------------------------------- > > Nice weekend, everyone! >
>From what I am reading in this thread, nobody seems to agree about what they really want. I think that that is a pretty good sign that a consensus is not going to happen. openbsd.org is on CVS. OpenBSD comes with a built-in httpd. As long as it's not publicly available, anyone can run a copy and insert whatever CSS meets their needs. The current website version can be updated from CVS. Just change the stylesheet link to whatever your favorite styling looks like and you are good. If you don't know how to write CSS, learn it. What doesn't require learning something new to use or contribute to OpenBSD? Nothing. That is my opinion. I definitely do not get a vote, especially since I have never even submitted a diff for the website. Unless I am using my phone, I give it a 50% chance that I will be using a text browser to view the site. I use lynx 100% to look at the packages and installation files. It just works. -- Chris Bennett
