-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 M. David Peterson wrote: > On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 10:27:36 -0600, Milo van der Linden > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Wow! >> >> Thank you all for the comments! > > Please forgive me for being late to the party, but I'd like to quickly > inject a few comments of my own if that's okay. - From your comments, I can tell that you have arrived at the right party! You are hitting target on the perspective of cherokee that interests me the most too: getting cherokee "in the spotlight" > >> A couple of (careful) conclusions: >> //1//- Monitoring website behaviour might be useful (2 comments >> including mine), but we prefer not to use Google (2 comments). > > Honestly, as far as the Cherokee project is concerned, tracking using > behavior is a red herring. It's a distraction from what matters most: > The number of active installations in use on the web. I agree mostly, knowing where people visit, how they enter and how long they stay is only useful to enhance the website content. So I will give it low priority. > > In other words, what should matter most is how many people are using > Cherokee, not which pages they visit on http://cherokee-project.com on > which day. That's not to suggest that understanding the behavior(s) of > site visitors is a bad thing. It's just not as important as actively > supporting and evangelizing the product. If people have a problem with > the site, they'll either tell you or never come back again. And in my > opinion the best way to ensure the former rather than the latter is to > provide a proper and positive snapshot of community activity. Cherokee > is an active web server project. But that's not immediately obvious > when you visit the site. e.g. Benchmarks from 4 top level releases ago > which provide nothing more than superficial benchmarks based on nothing > but seemingly random numbers pulled from out of hat. No links. No > "Here's the benchmark we used.". Nothing.
I have a virtual machine ready with the latest svn cherokee, lighttpd and apache to rerun the benchmarks. I am only waiting for the 0.8.0 to reach stable. Then I hope the new benchmarks will find their way to the website. I have automated the installation script for cherokee/apache/lighttpd. It can be re-run with every new release ;-) Hope that partially answers one of the questions. > > That's a problem. > >> I have looked at some alternatives, taken in consideration that the >> cherokee-project website generates apache compatible log files and came >> across: >> >> * http://awstats.sourceforge.net (cgi/perl based, no database needed. >> Basically, it is creating visual appealing views of the logfiles.) >> * http://piwik.org/ (needs php and mysql..) >> * Of course there is webalizer http://www.webalizer.com/ (C, w3c logfile >> formats) >> >> Anyone wants to say something on that? > > Yes. Don't waste your time. Ok. Focus your time on selling Cherokee to > that web serving masses. Cherokee is *fantastic* web server. But > that's not what the current state of marketing material suggests. > Instead it suggests "We're faster and better than everyone else, but > we're not going to tell you why or provide way's for you to figure this > out for yourself." Thanks! That is indeed my goal. Would it be good to focus on: 1- remove dead links 2- structure content and documentation 3- when 0.8.0 launches: put benchmark online, 4- Inform the (online)press of the launch? > > Fix the above and you'll be amazed at how popular Cherokee becomes. Of this I am certain! > >> >> //2//- Per version documentation, structured and with the option to >> leave comments. >> >> A big concern here is that spam will flow the documentation. I >> understand the project had some really bad experiences in the past. > > Write the documentation yourself. Don't trust other people to do it. > They either won't, or -- just as you fear -- will use the opportunity to > spam the hell out of you. > >> I will work out a plan for this and when it is more concrete, present it >> here on the list. > > By all means. But please focus your time on fixing things from the > inside out, not the outside in. There are bigger problems than that of > not understanding the "patterns" of your site visitors. Fix the > documentation/perception side of things and you might be amazed at how > much your log files won't matter anymore. > >> Thanks again and I know my homework for now ;-) > > Let me just add that I am definitely in the mindset that if the Cherokee > project can find ways to both document and promote themselves better, I > am definitely interested in both using it and promoting it far and > wide. I currently have Lawrence Lessig's media server running on > Cherokee > http://media.lessig.org/ <. There are several of both his > sites as well as several other sites I'd like to move to Cherokee as > time allows. But it's really hard to convince people like Professor > Lessig "the reason we need to use this web server is because of ..." > when the only "..."'s I have available to me are ambigious benchmarks > and hearsay about how much Cherokee *rocks* the casbah. > > Sincerely, > > A Cherokee Fan > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFIiMhCiCYTRyqLCBURAiJ2AJ0W1jlPONXKdquvSfOwLLrST6VKPgCfV2RC bDpqBS+wR6qApjIWbmazLtE= =yxGc -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Cherokee mailing list [email protected] http://lists.octality.com/listinfo/cherokee
