I quite agree - that the UX / purpose / consensus driven redesign is the challenge here not technology.
Once you have the design worked out and nicely described with some branding, approach, POC for a few pages vibe-coded, in the modern AI era, most likely you can AI-generate the whole of the redesign, refactor, and even change the underlying technology as part of the process. The era when you needed to be a particular website technology specialist to develop even complex websites, is essentially gone. You just need to know what you want to achieve and know what questions to ask. J. On Thu, Jan 22, 2026 at 10:18 AM Karol Brejna <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello, > > I was just about to suggest reaching out to Justin, as he is the most > active committer there :-) > > My other thought was to create a short survey (either for incubation > projects or the community in general) to determine what the current pain > points are. > My point being, if the site is to be rebuilt, it should be with clear > purpose in mind. > > The technology part should be easy then ;) > > Pozdrawiam, > Karol > > > czw., 22 sty 2026 o 10:06 Justin Mclean <[email protected]> > napisał(a): > > > Hi, > > > > Thanks for raising this, and thanks, Bertrand, for offering to help, I am > > also willing to help. > > > > I agree the Incubator site could benefit from a refresh. That said, it’s > > important to scope this carefully so it stays realistic for a bachelor’s > > thesis and fits how the ASF works. > > > > In particular, the student would need to be comfortable with a few > > constraints: > > > > - Working within the existing technology stack. > > - Treating this as an incremental improvement, not a green-field > redesign. > > - Making changes via public pull requests, with review and discussion > > happening asynchronously. > > - Understanding that this is an open source, consensus-driven process, > > where feedback may take time and changes are evaluated by the community, > > not a single “client”. > > > > If the student is happy with those constraints, I’m happy to help provide > > guidance on priorities and review PRs, alongside Bertrand. As with any > > Incubator resource, final acceptance would still rest with the IPMC. > > > > A good next step would be for the student to propose a short scope or > plan > > so we can check it before substantial work begins. > > > > Kind regards, > > Justin > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > >
