> > if clicking on the "code" tab, the whol website recenter and has smaller > width (1024) than before. you may have to test with high browser > resolution > I should look into this though, sounds like the code css is overriding the other widths. I don't think he was complaining that it was too wide, Julian, just that the code section did not match the rest of the site. I can't remember right now if the code was using different templates than the rest of the site.
Thanks again for the feedback everyone, Devon On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 7:49 AM, jug <j...@fantasymail.de> wrote: > Hey, > > Thanks for the feedback. > > > I have a suggestion: If you download a code snippet, it gets named like >> '49.py' or '55.py'. But a filename would be more useful, like >> 'ZoomScreen.py' instead of '55.py >> > Good idea, I've changed that. > > > if clicking on the "code" tab, the whol website recenter and has smaller >> width (1024) than before. you may have to test with high browser >> resolution >> > I know that. Not yet sure whats better. The smaller, fixed width was the > original style, but sometimes its not enough space for the entire content > (logged in as admin or with very long user name). > > > I only have one question; how is updating the new site different from the >> old? Is the Django site still serving most things from static pages and >> just using the database to store comments and such, or did they use one of >> the little CMS doo-dads available for use with Django? >> > The site runs with an own database. Currently its sqlite, but since its > done with Django, most other db backends should work as well. All content > except the documentation is stored in the database. It's possible to convert > data from the current pygame.org db, but you cannot use the same data or > database without converting. > > > The issue is some people felt Jug and the others went ahead without proper >> discussion before-hand. >> > Some people wanted to rewrite the website as well, but not with Django. The > discussion got nowhere fast, so we just started (otherwise, I think we would > be still discussing). Also, those who wanted to write a website with other > tools, did not do that (afaik). The same applies to the details. You cannot > discuss every single detail on such a mailing list. Everyone has his own > opinion, but you can only implement it one way. So we did it how we deemed > it right and then showed it to the list so that everyone could have a look > at it, test it, and tell us whether it is ok or he found any no-go's. > > > -- Julian >
