Millan wrote: > On Tuesday 08 May 2007 05:12:58 michael sephton wrote: > >>> Now, back to the topic, is it something going to be done with website or >>> > not? > >> I think when someone has the time they can download the fltk website via >> svn as described here: http://www.fltk.org/svn.php#CHECKOUT. They can >> modify it until they think they have a superior design. Then they can >> put it up on the web somewhere to show the fltk community, and perhaps >> everyone will agree whether or not it is a good replacement, or perhaps >> the community can have some kind of vote, or perhaps the main developers >> will simply accept or reject the suggested alternative design. >> > > Or maybe we all talked for nothing. If by changing few entries in (I guess) > several CSS files, you suggest that one should download the whole website > modify it, put it somwhere where people could view it, only to be probably > rejected once more, because its not too "programmerish" than *that* is a > waste of time. > There is no need to be ironic by saying "superior desig", I personally wanted > only to help by pointing out some of the things that makes people, deciding > which GUI library to start using, that FLTK is serious and mature library. > Anyway I'm done with this. > > _______________________________________________ > fltk mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk > >
Fltk2 should be set up with its own newsgroup and everyone subscribed to general should be subscribed to fltk2. This would let people filter the messages better but still keep track of dev. As far as the website goes, the real problem is that there are errors and incomplete references in the documentation. You could give out svn accounts with access only to the docs. Is this already available? That would allow regular users to contribute and only require the devs to review it every other week or so. In my experience, a wiki is better as it has namespaces and several other features that makes doc generation very efficient. However, it's been voiced that some don't like the wiki and it takes a lil more effort to convert it into an offline format. You should give it serious consideration. Just because toolkits in general have bad documentation doesn't mean fltk should go with the status quo. Keep up the good work, rs _______________________________________________ fltk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk
