I'm actually sort of leaning towards the idea of possibly using a discourse instance as a replacement for the registry. It would serve the dual purpose of incorporating a forum/comment system that we could use on the site as well (if we were so inclined).
Honestly, the existing functionality of the registry was pretty much exactly this. I'll expand on my rationale a little later. I'm personally not so sure that a Wordpress infrastructure would be the most appropriate (but would be happy to hear thoughts around it). On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 10:14 PM John Roper <johnroper...@gmail.com> wrote: > I would be willing to set it up. I have setup at least 5 wordpress sites > for various uses before. > I also write scripts for it. > On Monday, November 9, 2015, Andrew Toskin <and...@tosk.in> wrote: > > If we decide to rebuild the registry site from scratch, I think > > WordPress would be *much* easier to set up than Drupal or Joomla, and > > WordPress has pretty good spam filters via plugins officially sponsored > > by Automattic, the company developing. There are a lot of web CMS > > applications out there, but WordPress is by far the easiest to use > > among the PHP/MySQL stacks, and still pretty versatile for web > > development. > > Either way, I think the GIMP Plugin Registry provides an important > > service. We shouldn't let it fall to the wayside. > > On Sun, 2015-11-08 at 16:44 -0500, Kasim Ahmic wrote: > >> The site looks great! I only have a few minor cosmetic concerns > >> though: > >> > >> 1. The About GIMP, Documentation, Donations, Get Involved, and > >> Tutorial links in the footer and menu bar don't have icons next to > >> them. What's strange is that on the mobile version, the Documentation > >> and Tutorials links both have icons. I personally think these would > >> look nice: > >> - About GIMP: Not sure but maybe a question mark? > >> - Donations: A simple dollar sign > >> - Get Involved: A handshake > >> > >> 2. The images for the GIMP icon in the menu bar and footer are much > >> lower quality than the other icons. I'm only looking at the site on > >> my phone so I can't tell for sure but I'm gonna assume that the other > >> icons are vectors whereas the GIMP icon is a bitmap image. Also, the > >> icons for Scribus, Inkscape, and SwatchBooker should either be halved > >> in size or replaced with higher DPI icons for hi-res devices. Perhaps > >> do the same thing with the "Graphic Design Elements" and "Programming > >> Algorithms" backgrounds but loading higher DPI images for those might > >> start causing load issues for people on mobile devices so I don't > >> think that's too important personally. > >> > >> 3. The Recent News title on the News page doesn't have a border and > >> shadow underneath it like the Documentation, Tutorials, and other > >> titles on their respective pages do. > >> > >> 4. The OpenHub activity tracker's design and style doesn't fit with > >> the rest of the site. But that's just mostly color scheme and font. > >> > >> Other than that, everything else looks great! > >> > >> A far as the GIMP registry goes, part of me wants to preserve it and > >> just update Drupal to the latest version (assuming it's backwards > >> compatible) and hope it has better spam protection. But on the other > >> hand, I'd like to see it redone entirely in a way that's built for > >> spam protection from the group up. They both have their pros and > >> cons: > >> > >> Fix the Current Site > >> Pros: > >> - Should be relatively simple. > >> - No loss of plugins and posts. > >> - Current registry users won't have to learn a new system for > >> posting plugins or responses. > >> > >> Cons: > >> - AFAIK, there's no real version control on Drupal making it > >> difficult for users to find the version of a plugin their looking > >> for. > >> - Potential for future problems due to old server configs. > >> > >> Create an All New Site > >> Pros: > >> - We can rest assured spam won't be an issue. > >> - We can modify it to our and the users needs from the ground up. > >> > >> Cons: > >> - Will be a massive undertaking. > >> - Will have the need for moving over old plugins from the old site. > >> > >> Those are just my thoughts on it. > >> > >> Kasim Ahmic > >> > >> Sent from my iPhone > >> > >> > On Nov 8, 2015, at 10:27 AM, Pat David <patda...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > > >> > Thank you for taking the time to provide feedback! > >> > > >> > > On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 4:37 PM yahvuu <yah...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > On http://static.gimp.org/: > >> > > There is a typo in Section 'High Quality Photo Manipulation': > >> > > 'GIMP provides the tools for needed for high quality image' > >> > > (delete word) -------^ > >> > > >> > Awesome! Thank you for that - fixed in 41b3f77 > >> > > >> > > >> > > Things you might consider: > >> > > - Section 'Extensibility & Flexibility': > >> > > Add Link to http://registry.gimp.org/ > >> > > >> > > >> > I agree with adding this link to the section, but am not sure if we > >> > should > >> > hold off until we decide what we want to do with the registry (or > >> > just go > >> > ahead and link it, and let folks get the archived version until we > >> > switch > >> > things up). The registry is in a poor state, and there's not much > >> > we can > >> > do about it from our end (old drupal install that is vulnerable to > >> > spam). > >> > > >> > I was going to address some ideas in a separate thread on the ML > >> > later at > >> > some point and see what everyone thought. > >> > > >> > > >> > > - A new Section "Get Involved": > >> > > ~ "GIMP is a community project which is driven by > >> > > volunteers with > >> > > a wide range of interests and skills. Have a look how you can > >> > > become > >> > > part of the community" with link to gimp.org/develop/. *) > >> > > >> > Great idea! I'll have a look at integrating a section like > >> > this. Along > >> > that same idea, we should probably have a look at cleaning up > >> > /develop/ and > >> > making it a bit cleaner, simpler, clearer? We've already had a > >> > couple of > >> > commits for those pages, yay! > >> > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > On http://static.gimp.org/develop/ > >> > > - Section "GIMP Development Links": > >> > > > >> > > "Martin Nordholts’ GIMP Blog -- What happens in GIMP > >> > > development." > >> > > ^--- The blog is not active anymore, this item can be > >> > > deleted. > >> > > >> > I see that it's not active, though the information is still > >> > archived > >> > there. Should we delete the link completely or mark it as inactive > >> > and > >> > leave the link to the old material? I'm not sure on this and am > >> > looking > >> > for some guidance/opinions from those who know more than me. :) > >> > > >> > pat > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > gimp-web-list mailing list > >> > gimp-web-list@gnome.org > >> > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-web-list > >> _______________________________________________ > >> gimp-web-list mailing list > >> gimp-web-list@gnome.org > >> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-web-list > > _______________________________________________ > > gimp-web-list mailing list > > gimp-web-list@gnome.org > > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-web-list > > > > -- > John roper > President and CEO of Starlight Graphics Studio > Boston, MA USA > http://starlightgraphics.tuxfamily.org > > _______________________________________________ gimp-web-list mailing list gimp-web-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-web-list
