I don't think this is fair to the maintainers of Cabal and the Cabal
website. You can't do work nobody asked for and then get upset if
people are unwilling to adopt and maintain the unasked-for-code.
That's like buying someone a puppy, when you don't even know if they
like dogs. Writing software
> Writing software anew is the fun part, the not-fun part is
the maintenance.
Agree. Writing a new version is often faster and easier.
In this case the website is compact, so it is doable: why not use a new
framework every time someone wants to do a full rewrite?
Does the ticket rule out React?
On 2018-06-17 19:45, Imants Cekusins wrote:
>> Writing software anew is the fun part, the not-fun part is
> the maintenance.
>
> Agree.. Writing a new version is often faster and easier.
>
> In this case the website is compact, so it is doable: why not use a new
> framework every time someone
(Sorry for the duplicate, forgot to send to the list.)
On 2018-06-17 17:37, Imants Cekusins wrote:
>> doesn't seem to be any particular reason to
> require JS for basic functionality on a documentation site.)
>
> Js is widely used these days. E.g., ReadTheDocs use Js [1].
>
AFAICT this is only
Well, I put in a full week in this version.
If this website is not usable, fair enough.
Let's wait for the version that suits.
___
cabal-devel mailing list
cabal-devel@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cabal-devel
> doesn't seem to be any particular reason to
require JS for basic functionality on a documentation site.)
Js is widely used these days. E.g., ReadTheDocs use Js [1].
Users without Js in the browser may be redirected to a static html version
of the website.
This version uses the material design
Imants Cekusins writes:
>> doesn't seem to be any particular reason to
> require JS for basic functionality on a documentation site.)
>
> Js is widely used these days. E.g., ReadTheDocs use Js [1].
The fact that JavaScript is widely adopted makes it acceptable to use,
but it is not a _reason_
Please use this link instead to access the demo:
https://ciezbit.bitbucket.io/cabal
On Sun, 17 Jun 2018 13:32 Imants Cekusins, wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Re:
> https://github.com/haskell/cabal/issues/4013
>
> Would
> https://ciezbit.bitbucket.io/cabal/doc
> be an improvement over
>
Hi all,
Re:
https://github.com/haskell/cabal/issues/4013
Would
https://ciezbit.bitbucket.io/cabal/doc
be an improvement over
https://www.haskell.org/cabal/
?
This link points to a temporary demo deployment. The app is written in
React with material-ui lib.
On 2018-06-17 13:32, Imants Cekusins wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Re:
> https://github.com/haskell/cabal/issues/4013
>
> Would
> https://ciezbit.bitbucket.io/cabal/doc
> be an improvement over
> https://www.haskell.org/cabal/
> ?
>
> This link points to a temporary demo deployment. The app is written
The lads took it up:
https://github.com/haskell/cabal/issues/4013
Please join the discussion if interested.
___
cabal-devel mailing list
cabal-devel@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cabal-devel
11 matches
Mail list logo
