On 23 May 2001 00:43:56 +0200, Christoph Rauch wrote:
We might. But not today. The discussion could go into technical stuff
like how do we do this in php or something.
The more important problem now is: Who is helping out? Who does the
graphics, who the code? Where can we put the stuff?
On 23 May 2001 19:38:48 +0200, Christoph Rauch wrote:
Raphael Quinet schrieb:
That's pretty poor. Why would I want to update my bookmarks?
You need not. gimp.org will happily redirect you to the page you wanted.
Hmmm... This is better than nothing, but if would be nice if there
Tuomas Kuosmanen schrieb:
For the deeper nested pages like http://www.gimp.org/the_gimp_system_reqs.html
which are not as often linked I would recommend a redirect.
We should have those most-often-needed pages there, as they are not
going to collide with the new structure (I prefer
On Thu, May 24, 2001 at 04:46:21PM +0800, Malcolm Tredinnick wrote:
On Thu, May 24, 2001 at 11:28:57AM +0300, Ville Pätsi wrote:
Uhm. Funny enough, right now there is a big discussion in
gnome-webmaster list about wml.
It's not just on gnome-webmaster -- it's raging across a number of
On Fri, May 25, 2001 at 04:50:05AM -0400, Michael Spunt wrote:
I've hacked some lines right now, maybe you (and others) would like to
see it. Unfortunately, my f2s MySQL won't be available until 9:30am GMT,
so I had to test it at home. Anyway, these are the URLs:
On Fri, May 25, 2001 at 02:01:42PM +0200, Ingo Luetkebohle wrote:
Tuomas Kuosmanen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anyway. like Christoph said, the all most important thing is to
get the people to do it.
I volunteer to work on the development side.
As for the technical side, I leave that up
Eep. I have over 150k of mail about the gimp webpage now. Here's a
first reply to _some_ of it:
On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 04:20:00AM -0400, Michael Spunt wrote:
I tried some stuff ony my own, too. Maybe you would like to have a
look at it:
http://www.technoid.f2s.com/gimp.org/index.php
That's
Folks -
On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 02:17:25PM +0200, Christoph Rauch wrote:
Tom Rathborne schrieb:
So this really could have been a chicken and egg problem.
Yes, it seemed very chicken and egg to me. That's why I just
started doing something on my own. I have already made about half
of
Hi,
Raphael Quinet [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In addition to some of the things mentioned in Christoph's TODO list,
I would like to add a couple of things that should avoided for the
Gimp's web site:
[lots of good points deleted]
* Please don't use GIFs!
Salut, Sven
Tom Rathborne schrieb:
So this really could have been a chicken and egg problem.
Yes, it seemed very chicken and egg to me. That's why I just started
doing something on my own. I have already made about half of the
decisions in Christoph's excellent list -- but I doubt that most
people
Andreas Jaekel schrieb:
I suggest putting the GIMP web site in CVS along the source code.
We do this with our company web site and it has the usual benefits:
versioning, locking, all privileged people can do updates.
I'll put that on the list.
Christoph
Michael Spunt schrieb:
Yes, it seemed very chicken and egg to me. That's why I just started
doing something on my own. I have already made about half of the
decisions in Christoph's excellent list -- but I doubt that most
people will agree with all of those decisions. Maybe someone
Hi!
On Sat, 19 May 2001 09:09:55 +0200 Raphael Quinet [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Well, this looks interesting but I do not know if such a design is
appropriate for a Gimp site. Your design is modern/futuristic, but
these characteristics are not directly related to image editing,
Perhaps I
Michael Spunt schrieb:
* The new layout should not break the existing URLs. Many people have
If a user requests a page not available on the server, he / she gets
redirected to news, 404, we have changed or whatever from where he
/ she can navigate to the required page and realizes that
Raphael made a number of excellent points regarding
the site redesign. I'd like to reiterate some of
them and add something.
|* The new layout should not break the existing URLs. Many people have
| bookmarked some pages on www.gimp.org, and many web sites have
| direct links to the
Hi Christoph!
On Wed, 23 May 2001 16:07:46 +0200 Christoph Rauch
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
update bookmarks. Backward-compatibility isn't cool. :-) Also, a new
navigation structure would really force a new file naming and all.
a please update your bookmarks page would be the best choice,
Hello Miles!
Miles O'Neal schrieb:
In terms of layout, the gimp site is head and shoulders
above the vast majority of sites out there now.
right.
I think if we have a redesign there should be a good reason for it.
A fersh look is NOT important. Fresh content is far more
important.
On Wed, 23 May 101 10:23:57 -0500 (CDT), [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Miles O'Neal) said:
I know, I know. Since we're probably going to rewrite the site in
something less arcane and more known, now is the ideal time to revamp
the look and feel.
I hate it when sites change things. (My credit card
Kelly Martin schrieb:
I know, I know. Since we're probably going to rewrite the site in
something less arcane and more known, now is the ideal time to revamp
the look and feel.
I hate it when sites change things. (My credit card company changes
their online customer service system every
Christoph Rauch said...
| I think if we have a redesign there should be a good reason for it.
| A fersh look is NOT important. Fresh content is far more
| important. Consistency is a *good* thing.
|
|With a well designed site we could use the with our software you are able to do
|that
Nick Lamb schrieb:
That's pretty poor. Why would I want to update my bookmarks?
You need not. gimp.org will happily redirect you to the page you wanted.
Because you are a w1ck3d cool new webmaster?
Of course. ;-))
Because you've decided that
downloads go in foo/ and screenshots go in
Hi!
On Wed, 23 May 2001 17:13:54 +0200 Christoph Rauch
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have updated my lists at http://home.bn-paf.de/smokey/gimp_org/
It would be great if we could get all that uncertainty out of them.
:-))
We must know what we want to have as the result and how to get there.
On Wed, 23 May 2001 18:21:16 +0200, Christoph Rauch [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
Many sites have never changed since 1995. Some are changing too
frequently. With gimp.org we have sort of the first one (even if its
not THAT old). With a redesign in both content and structure we can
be more flexible
Kelly Martin said...
|Example: http://www.gimp.org/download/ Result: 404 - not found
|
|That's not a look and feel issue, it's just a broken link problem
|that has nothing to do with look and feel.
While it's a tangential LNF issue, it *is* an LNF issue.
A plain old page not found error is fine
Hi Nick!
On Wed, 23 May 2001 16:47:14 +0100 Nick Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
update bookmarks. Backward-compatibility isn't cool. :-) Also, a new
navigation structure would really force a new file naming and all.
That's pretty poor. Why would I want to update my bookmarks? Because
you are
Raphael Quinet schrieb:
That's pretty poor. Why would I want to update my bookmarks?
You need not. gimp.org will happily redirect you to the page you wanted.
Hmmm... This is better than nothing, but if would be nice if there
could be some real pages (not redirects) at the following
On Wed, 23 May 2001, Christoph Rauch wrote:
[...]
The site-design neednt be redesigned from scratch. It may be enough to
polish it up and remove the Gimp-standard-script-look, which was copied
all over the web and today has a bit trashy touch. Definitely not a good
representation for the
Raphael Quinet schrieb:
The site-design neednt be redesigned from scratch. It may be enough to
polish it up and remove the Gimp-standard-script-look, which was copied
all over the web and today has a bit trashy touch. Definitely not a good
representation for the greatest graphic
Raphael Quinet said...
|But it is very important to have most of the graphics (titles, etc.)
|done with a script that is included in the standard Gimp distribution
|so that every Gimp user can make the same things with only a couple of
|mouse clicks. Contrary to some companies that have to
Whether you like it or not, gimp has been ported to mac and windoze. All
gimp info should be accessible and helpful for all. And point to os
specific help when needed. And yes, even be viewable with internet
explorer. (My mom uses that, sorry).
Michael Spunt wrote:
Hi Nick!
On Wed, 23
On Wed, 23 May 2001, Simon Budig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Christoph Rauch ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
The current page displayed in lynx is suboptimal.
Well, at least it is not too bad. It is still looking better in lynx
than http://gug.sunsite.dk/ and some other gimp-related pages. ;-)
Hi Christoph!
So I gave myself a hand and wrote down a list of things I learned to
give attention to, when creating big web-projects:
http://home.bn-paf.de/smokey/proposal_for_gimp_org.html
I think it's a great step in the right direction. The gimp.org discussion
ist really not young and
Hi,
Christoph Rauch [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Is there a mailinglist for the gimp webpage yet?
nope. But we can certainly set up one if the traffic on this
list increases too much or the people that want to discuss this
issue demand one. For the moment, I'd suggest we keep the
discussion
Sven Neumann schrieb:
Is there a mailinglist for the gimp webpage yet?
nope. But we can certainly set up one if the traffic on this
list increases too much or the people that want to discuss this
issue demand one. For the moment, I'd suggest we keep the
discussion here. Please don't
-developer] The GIMP Webpage
Hi,
Christoph Rauch [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Is there a mailinglist for the gimp webpage yet?
nope. But we can certainly set up one if the traffic on this
list increases too much or the people that want to discuss this
issue demand one. For the moment, I'd
35 matches
Mail list logo
