Re: Cabal website

2018-06-19 Thread Mikhail Glushenkov
Hi, On 17 June 2018 at 18:20, Christopher Allen wrote: > 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. To be fair, Imants contacted me

Re: Cabal website

2018-06-17 Thread Imants Cekusins
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

Re: Cabal website

2018-06-17 Thread Bardur Arantsson
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

Re: Cabal website

2018-06-17 Thread Imants Cekusins
> 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?

Re: Cabal website

2018-06-17 Thread Christopher Allen
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

Re: Cabal website

2018-06-17 Thread Imants Cekusins
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

Re: Cabal website

2018-06-17 Thread Bardur Arantsson
(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

Re: Cabal website

2018-06-17 Thread Thomas Tuegel
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_

Re: Cabal website

2018-06-17 Thread Imants Cekusins
> 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

Re: Cabal website

2018-06-17 Thread Bardur Arantsson
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

Re: Cabal website

2018-06-17 Thread Imants Cekusins
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 >