It seems like the only thing that can be agreed upon is that there needs to be a redesign.
I Agree with the statement of "know your target", if the target is not MooTools developers then it needs to be something fancy that is going to catch their eye and say "wow, that is cool". Programmers on the other hand for the most part aren't as interested in the cool look as they are in the cool functionality, architecture, etc. On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 6:47 AM, RipTheJacker <[email protected]> wrote: > I agree with some of the others about the old, more flashy and > friendly, design. That's what initially brought me to using MooTools > over other frameworks out there. Apache is a poor example. Like > someone earlier said, that market is not the same as with MooTools. > Also, plenty of tools target toward developers have nice designs > anyway. Look at Nginx, or the Ruby community, or the website for our > President (which influenced better design in every other candidate's > site). Design is as important a tool to get your point across as > documentation. > > > On Sep 29, 2:48 am, Christoph Pojer <[email protected]> wrote: > > At this point I am convinced Aaron gets paid for all the lobbying he does > > for Apache. >
