I understand the urge to keep the scope manageable, but I am not sure I see in Daniel's list where the improvement is likely to come. It is a little concern of mine that we are emphasizing ease of authorship for a reasonably small subset of Jenkins users (those who write code) over the general usability of the site. ...but if we don't get content authored, it won't be much of site, so... pick your poison, I guess.
None-the-less, I would think we would want to pick at least one area of the site where we were committing to actually making the site better, not just switching to what we believe will be a more convenient technology. My push back looks like this: - I would have ordered your list of content areas by importance and placed plugins at or near the top. I think we are doing a bit of a hand wave there. It can and should be A LOT better than it is today, with browsing, searching, ratings and reviews. If we did that alone, we will have greatly advanced this site. Not doing so, I think, would be a big opportunity missed. - Search seems to be missing from both the doc and the blog. I wouldn't say the blog is good today. You can't browse it and you cannot search it. Basically, if an article is more than a week old, good luck finding it. It might be that we just want to punt and port the blog to flat files and call that good. ...but if we want to make it better, the blog should be browsable by author, category and rating, as well as searchable. Any number of free-ware blog sites and tools offer these basics out of the box. - Doc needs to be searchable. Ideally it would also be integrated with technical blog posts and javadoc, If our website cannot offer search features at least equal to a free WordPress site, we should ask what we are doing and why we are doing it. - Events need to be handled somehow in the new site. They are handled poorly in the current site. I am a little concerned they will be handled even worse in the new site. Again, I think a reasonable, and now surprisingly high bar should be event handling of equal quality to that which you might expect to get with a free WordPress site with an event widget added. - I think limiting comments would be unfortunate, but I have made my pitch. I guess that is sort of critical sounding. I hope not too much so. If you look at any number of the 'instant website' hosting services (almost all of which have a free version), they have effectively set the bar so far above where Jenkins-ci.org is today, that I feel like we have the wrong benchmark. If we are going to take on the effort of making a custom site, rather than just grabbing a commodity site, I think what we build ourselves needs to be in some way better or at least equal to the commodity version. ...if we can't do better than a stock WordPress site, why wouldn't we just use a stock WordPress site? The bar has really come up a long way in the last 5 to 10 years. The good news is that a lot of these "fancy" features are now old-hat. On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 5:17 PM, Kohsuke Kawaguchi <[email protected]> wrote: > +1. > > This is basically what I was originally thinking, and my sense is that > this is very close to what many of us want. > > 2015-10-07 16:45 GMT-07:00 Daniel Beck <[email protected]>: > >> So from aggregating existing comments it looks to me like the following >> seems to be at least a reasonable basis for further discussion: >> >> * Use a static site generator with a Git repo on GitHub as the source for >> the site. Goal: Allow community to contribute content. >> [Updated Confluence could also work, but would retain the problems of >> unreviewed content, comments, and non-plain text editing.] >> * Have actual content, like good documentation, especially for getting >> started. This includes moving some of the wiki's content into the site. >> * Feature the blog [and possibly the event calendar] more prominently. >> * Do not have "comments everywhere", limit to specific sections like the >> blog. >> * Make it easy to contribute, possibly through having an "Edit" ("Improve >> this page"?) link on every page, if possible. >> >> Comments? >> >> -- >> 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/0146B189-5C80-4098-A05C-CE833E5CF5B2%40beckweb.net >> . >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > > > -- > Kohsuke Kawaguchi > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the > Google Groups "Jenkins Developers" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/jenkinsci-dev/EMbE3a4u8nA/unsubscribe. > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to > [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CAN4CQ4zPidLbdn5j04%3D-q%3D1G-hz7kFQ_uC2t65nvyaLfup1fvA%40mail.gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CAN4CQ4zPidLbdn5j04%3D-q%3D1G-hz7kFQ_uC2t65nvyaLfup1fvA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- 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/CAOcHHXwdNOOyWdEa4qJ-UWRdR%3DHYFhOapbXnk8_vSJqHi-RAHw%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
