On 07.10.2015, at 11:13, Baptiste Mathus <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm currently quite happy with the box on the right about downloading > Jenkins. I guess this one could be made even bigger and polished, but > basically it has the information I'm generally wanting to crawl: > * Download either LTS or latest
I've seen quite a few users who don't know that LTS exists or what it is. So there's still some potential for improvement here. > * Changelog (maybe even more importantly. Btw, maybe even more love about the > user feedback per version could be given. That feature is absolutely great). > * Must be one of the first things you see when coming to jenkinsci.org (or > jenkins.cd or jenkins.build ;-)). So here's one of the problems: The site doesn't tell you anything when you visit if you don't already know everything. Want to learn about Jenkins? Go to the wiki (and that has its own problems -- https://wiki.jenkins-ci.org/pages/diffpages.action?originalId=82020311&pageId=82020440). Hope it doesn't advertise Indonesian (?) drugs today. We have a blog, but its visibility is fairly low -- a section on the index page about the newest N blog posts would be helpful. Similarly with the event calendar, where we've started adding events where people talk about Jenkins to it -- but I doubt anyone has noticed. > Apart from that, random thoughts on the current one: > * 1094 is wrong (IIRC, almost 1200 currently). We need to either find a way > to retrieve the correct value, or be approx. Not displaying a wrong precise > number. We only consider released and published plugins, not repos. It takes the information from http://updates.jenkins-ci.org/pluginCount.txt; which is generated during update site generation. It's about the same number as plugins in the JSON (depending on which variant you're using), so there may be a bug involving the different update sites we generate, but it's not off by more than 20 or so. > * going to the wiki, with different font is disruptive indeed. Would be great Yep, I'm advocating for *some* blessed (well, reviewed) documentation. Some wiki pages (e.g. on reverse proxy) are a sequence of {info} boxes that each were added by a different author, rather than one coherent page. We can, and should, do better than that. It'll also give us a chance to overhaul some terribly outdated documentation -- for example, https://wiki.jenkins-ci.org/display/JENKINS/Building+a+software+project should probably mention Subversion post-commit hook endpoints. > * Having recently revamped my blog using a static site generator (Hugo), I'm > excited about the same thing going on for Jenkins Website. I personnally > think this will indeed increase/improve contribution overall. Awesome! I'm really looking forward to seeing PRs for site content (and even structure/design). I think this has great potential for greater community involvement. > * Docker package: outdated image too. Now it's docker pull jenkins (but pull > isn't going to be enough, anyway :)) The LTS tab has that command (which gives you current LTS); and jenkinsci/jenkins is supposed to be the current weekly. Not sure who maintains that though. > * do we really want to keep the "Upgrading from hudson" on the front page in > the future? Good point. No. If you're still on Hudson, that train has left the station long ago. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Jenkins Developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/A321D0C9-836F-49CA-B002-979D69DB98B1%40beckweb.net. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
