Re: [2.0] Website rebump

I'm saying YES to showcase the plugins, but NO to hiding the extensibility way down the plugin list. IMHO the extensibility documentation is equally important as the plugins themselves and the user and installation guides, i.e. it should not be more than one click (and no scrolling) from the main

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

Back to the tech, If we go for a static site generation with a PR model I believe we need to have the individual plugin pages distributed somehow, because if everything is centralized to one repo with a PR model then we could risk loosing the wonderful silo model we currently have with plugins. I

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

Assuming the plugins moved into the static model and didn't remain in the Wiki side. Personally I think that perhaps we are trying to bite off too much in one chunk. Would a good starting point be taking a small part of the site (e.g. the Drupal + some basic getting started type stuff) and doing

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

TOP POSTING because holy mega-thread batman! :) What I see happening here is solutions being mixed up with problem statements The top-level goals, in my opinion are (in no particular order): * Make a good usable site, that looks good and connects visitors with the information that is

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

2015-10-09 14:34 GMT-07:00 R. Tyler Croy : > What I see happening here is solutions being mixed up with problem > statements > ... > Anyways, if you're passionate about the subject, fleshing out ideas and > proposals in confluence is IMHO the best path forward. > Let me

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

Tried out the demo you had setup - overall I think it is good for content that doesn't change too often but I worry about content that changes on a regular basis or trying to get somebody who isn't that upskilled in things like GitHub to understand and follow the process. (e.g. The fact that after

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

I think the talk of scrolling and hover menus is a giant red-herring. The form factor of the pages needs to be malleable and determined at least in part by the device requesting the information. We should not be trying to build a website from the toolbar menu down. We shouldn't be writing a new

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

> WDYT? That could work, but I'm personally not fond of drop down menus as it tends to be a suboptimal experience on touch devices. /B On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 12:36 PM, Daniel Beck wrote: > > On 09.10.2015, at 12:18, Robert Sandell wrote: > > > If we

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

On 09.10.2015, at 12:18, Robert Sandell wrote: > If we go for a static site generation with a PR model I believe we need to > have the individual plugin pages distributed somehow, because if everything > is centralized to one repo with a PR model then we could risk

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

On 09.10.2015, at 12:43, Robert Sandell wrote: > That could work, but I'm personally not fond of drop down menus as it tends > to be a suboptimal experience on touch devices. Check out how centos.org looks on your phone (or your browser at 770 or fewer pixels wide).

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

On 09.10.2015, at 12:24, Richard Bywater wrote: > In all of this I'd still like to have a discussion on how we might get > Confluence up to a modern version which would, I think, allow for a lot of > the "features" that we are looking for for some of the content at least.

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

On Friday, October 9, 2015 at 12:50:00 PM UTC+2, Daniel Beck wrote: > > > On 09.10.2015, at 12:43, Robert Sandell > wrote: > > > That could work, but I'm personally not fond of drop down menus as it > tends to be a suboptimal experience on touch devices. > > Check

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

On 08.10.2015, at 06:39, Gus Reiber wrote: > I understand the urge to keep the scope manageable, but I am not sure I see > in Daniel's list where the improvement is likely to come. It is a little > concern of mine that we are emphasizing ease of authorship for a

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

+1 I'd imagined something like www.git-scm.com. They've had over 100 individual contributors. I'd completely bin comments. I don't see why the site needs to *host* a blog - why can't it just be links to Jenkins articles elsewhere. Bigger requirements just end up sucking you towards the

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

Do we have any site statistics on the current site of what pages are most frequently viewed? That could feed into a perhaps better discussion on what type of information to focus on. One thing that makes me a bit uneasy in the discussion so far is the fact that both Daniel and Gus seems to glance

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

2015-10-08 4:06 GMT-07:00 Nigel Magnay : > +1 > > I'd imagined something like www.git-scm.com. They've had over 100 > individual contributors. > Yep, another static site backed by Git ... oh wait, it's actually a Rails app. Hmm. > I'd completely bin comments. I don't

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

2015-10-08 3:08 GMT-07:00 Robert Sandell : > Do we have any site statistics on the current site of what pages are most > frequently viewed? That could feed into a perhaps better discussion on what > type of information to focus on. > We have it connected to Google

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

Oh no The internet never forgets! ...tonight I am going to party like it is 1999: https://web.archive.org/web/2816062846/http://devex.allaire.com/developer/gallery/index.cfm ...I take it back. App Stores are way, way, way sexier. On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 2:06 PM, Christopher Orr

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

On 08/10/15 21:44, Baptiste Mathus wrote: > 2015-10-08 20:36 GMT+02:00 Gus Reiber >: > Personally, I think the demonstration of Jenkins extensibility > is more impressive than the saying of it. And, that demonstration is > the

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

I think plugins are almost exactly like apps in an app store. Way back when I worked at Allaire, we (Mike Nimer and I) built a Developer's exchange that featured CFML applets and code snippets. That experience was designed very much like today's app-stores (but with older and crappier web-tech).

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

On 08.10.2015, at 23:12, Christopher Orr wrote: > Static site generation would be great, but as Richard commented on > INFRA-373 (and I agreed), it becomes a bit difficult to contribute to a > site like this when testing your contribution properly requires > installing a site

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

2015-10-08 23:06 GMT+02:00 Christopher Orr : > Thanks for the explanation, and video! Do you have any old screenshots > of the Allaire stuff, out of curiosity? > > That grid does seems nice, and yeah, we do know which plugins are newest > (I'm a fan of @jenkins_release) though I

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

Yeah, so if I am understanding you correctly, Robert, you are saying that you would like to be able to highlight some bits of content over others? I would think that would just be a matter of marking particular content pieces with a tag that pushes them to the top of the homepage. It also sounds

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

2015-10-08 20:36 GMT+02:00 Gus Reiber : > Yeah, so if I am understanding you correctly, Robert, you are saying that > you would like to be able to highlight some bits of content over others? I > would think that would just be a matter of marking particular content > pieces

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

So from aggregating existing comments it looks to me like the following seems to be at least a reasonable basis for further discussion: * Use a static site generator with a Git repo on GitHub as the source for the site. Goal: Allow community to contribute content. [Updated Confluence could

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

+1. This is basically what I was originally thinking, and my sense is that this is very close to what many of us want. 2015-10-07 16:45 GMT-07:00 Daniel Beck : > So from aggregating existing comments it looks to me like the following > seems to be at least a reasonable basis

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

I understand the urge to keep the scope manageable, but I am not sure I see in Daniel's list where the improvement is likely to come. It is a little concern of mine that we are emphasizing ease of authorship for a reasonably small subset of Jenkins users (those who write code) over the general

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

On 08.10.2015, at 01:45, Daniel Beck wrote: > So from aggregating existing comments it looks to me like the following seems > to be at least a reasonable basis for further discussion: > > * Use a static site generator with a Git repo on GitHub as the source for the > site.

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

I think a major disconnect to me still looks like scope. In previous discussions it's been the Drupal side only but then in comments in this thread it starts crossing over to the Wiki side of things as well. I don't know if it exists already but a guide to what content would be available to

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

jieryn wrote: > Show me the beef. Where's the repo? Right now, we don't have a Git repo or pull requests, because it's Drupal rather than a static site. The site doesn't even integrate with the common Jenkins community accounts (or GitHub) that everyone already has. >

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

I use Jenkins but haven't been part of the developer community historically, so some user/outsider perspective may be of interest. Of course, I'm not claiming to speak for all users: On 10/6/2015 6:17 PM, Gus Reiber wrote: The way I see it is this... to be a good site, the site needs to have

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

On 07.10.2015, at 14:51, Christopher Simons wrote: >> We don't get site traffic until the site is good. > > Respectfully, I think this is mistaken. The way to get "traffic" is to > create a good product that people want. If people want to download Jenkins,

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

That sounds great then. I like the idea of community members being able to blog about something they are doing or some plugin they found interesting. On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 8:33 AM Gus Reiber wrote: > To my mind, anyone with something to say should be encouraged to blog

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

Would the blog be available to anyone, or just CloudBees employees? On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 7:56 AM Daniel Beck wrote: > > On 07.10.2015, at 14:51, Christopher Simons < > christopherleesim...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> We don't get site traffic until the site is good. > > > >

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

To my mind, anyone with something to say should be encouraged to blog on the site. It should be easy for them. And that is the sort of traffic, I think we should seek to encourage. I like Christopher's comments quite a bit, so I think I should clarify my own position a bit. I don't think

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

So I have been somewhat hesitant of going with a flat-file approach, and I think that is the disconnect. I think a system that starts based on flat files is a little quicker to get off the ground, maybe, but a little tougher to things like guest authorship and the sort of graduated permissions

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

On 07.10.2015, at 19:22, Kohsuke Kawaguchi wrote: > Where is the new need for moderation? Let me quote Gus' vision for the new site, from https://wiki.jenkins-ci.org/display/JENKINS/Jenkins+2.0+Website+vision+from+Gus+Reiber : > the right to establish a personal page and

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

It only requires a massive amount of moderation if a massive number of people sign up and start adding content. Which to my mind, would be massively awesome. More likely, we will build the site and content authoring will trickle in. If we invest in it, it will get better and the content flow will

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 1:34 PM, Daniel Beck wrote: > Visitors will be able to comment on _everything_. Basically like the wiki > today Wait, we are allowing comments on pages? Sounds like a bad idea. In the current wiki these are often incorrect, digressive, misleading, and/or

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

On 07.10.2015, at 19:38, Jesse Glick wrote: > Wait, we are allowing comments on pages? Sounds like a bad idea. In > the current wiki these are often incorrect, digressive, misleading, > and/or misplaced. If you have something constructive to add to a > page’s contents,

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

That is the other side of the coin. Personally, I think no comments are worse than bad comments. No comments and it looks like the community is dead. Bad comments can be corrected, and will be corrected, if the site succeeds in generating an atmosphere of collaboration. On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

OK, so you were reacting to the input from Gus. That sure contains a lot of ideas that go far beyond what I originally proposed in the mega thread. I also realize now that this summary wiki page could read as if the Gus vision is our plan

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

I agree that Doc is the most static content type and in some ways maybe the most important for this site... ...but if you look at the doc that is there now, when was it last updated and against which version of the product? It is reassuring (to me, anyway) to be able to open a comments list and

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

On 07.10.2015, at 19:41, Gus Reiber wrote: > Bad comments can be corrected, and will be corrected, if the site succeeds in > generating an atmosphere of collaboration. How well that works can be seen in the wiki. We don't really have moderation there, and the comment

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

well our current site definitely shows signs of neglect. In regards to the comments, it is hard to know what is the cause and what is the effect. A stale site looks the part. Ideally a good site generates some life of its own. Especially in a community case where you don't have a team or

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

+1 On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 8:44 AM Daniel Beck wrote: > > On 07.10.2015, at 17:05, Slide wrote: > > > Would the blog be available to anyone, or just CloudBees employees? > > It's the Jenkins community blog, so the former -- but I suggest that we >

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

exactly. I think that would be greatly valuable to a lot of people. so long as the browse and search interface of the site can handle the volume of content, and the volume of content is great enough that people think to look for it. On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 8:35 AM, Slide

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

On 07.10.2015, at 17:05, Slide wrote: > Would the blog be available to anyone, or just CloudBees employees? It's the Jenkins community blog, so the former -- but I suggest that we implement that using a model similar to core committership, in which occasional

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

+1. This isn't a website that stands on its own - it's information about Jenkins. That's it. A. On Wednesday, October 7, 2015, Daniel Beck wrote: > > On 07.10.2015, at 19:41, Gus Reiber > > wrote: > > > Bad comments can be corrected, and

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

Slightly different tack. Does anyone have sites that they like that are similar to ours? Though not a great parallel, because it is full of pictures, I quite like this community site: https://www.behance.net/ In place of pictures, our site might feature plugins, but otherwise we could be

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

The bootstrap one is more in the right direction. A. On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 8:07 PM, Gus Reiber wrote: > Slightly different tack. > > Does anyone have sites that they like that are similar to ours? > > Though not a great parallel, because it is full of pictures, I

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

http://arquillian.org/ ...is another site I know KK likes. It is statically generated. On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 11:13 AM, Andrew Bayer wrote: > The bootstrap one is more in the right direction. > > A. > > On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 8:07 PM, Gus Reiber

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

If we were to rank the value of our resources on jenkins-ci.org what would be on top? If it were me, I would rank them like this: 1) the download . . 2) the plugins . 3) the doc 4) events 5) the blog but I would like to see us do something a little more interesting with the blog so that it

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

2015-10-02 17:58 GMT-07:00 Daniel Beck : > > On 02.10.2015, at 20:17, Kohsuke Kawaguchi wrote: > > > My key take away is that we can drive participation more by encouraging > people to sign up and create an account, which converts them from anonymous >

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

Exactly this. I feel like there's a disconnect. To me, it reads like we are actually mostly in agreement. 2015-10-07 2:25 GMT-07:00 Daniel Beck : > jieryn wrote: > > > Show me the beef. Where's the repo? > > Right now, we don't have a Git repo or pull

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

I re-read this and I think I understand you better. 2015-10-02 17:58 GMT-07:00 Daniel Beck : > > On 02.10.2015, at 20:17, Kohsuke Kawaguchi wrote: > > > My key take away is that we can drive participation more by encouraging > people to sign up and create an

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

from little acorns, grow... On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 9:59 AM, Kohsuke Kawaguchi wrote: > > > 2015-10-02 17:58 GMT-07:00 Daniel Beck : > >> >> On 02.10.2015, at 20:17, Kohsuke Kawaguchi wrote: >> >> > My key take away is that we can drive

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

Seriously, this idea is so obvious I almost hate to mention it. Make the site a repository and accept pull requests. How hard is that? I bet the site would improve drastically with small and simple pull requests, but also large changes which let users really go wild. Jenkins was made great by

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

Show me the beef. Where's the repo? On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 11:39 PM, Gus Reiber wrote: > Fair enough. > Let's see the pull requests, then. It has been a long time and they haven't > come. > > ...10 years as you point out for the product GUI. I am not sure when the >

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

Fair enough. Let's see the pull requests, then. It has been a long time and they haven't come. ...10 years as you point out for the product GUI. I am not sure when the Jenkins-ci.org website was last overhauled, but I am guessing at least 5 years ago. On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 8:34 PM, jieryn

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

That's fair. Moderating a sight can get to be a lot of work. ...although, at the point at which you have so much externally contributed content that the task of moderating the site becomes a big burden, the site is almost by definition a big success. The current website doesn't generate a lot

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

For now, I think it's good to keep the discussion in ML because there are enough people participating in 2.0 conversations in real time. We can then summarize our consensus into tickets. So I'm going to respond you here. In INFRA-373 , you wrote:

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

Someone pointed me a Reddit thread about Jenkins 2.0, in which one guy compares what he values in Bamboo. These would be great additions to our feature listing page in the website. Let's

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

And this is the earlier prototype done by Tyler. 2015-10-02 11:17 GMT-07:00 Kohsuke Kawaguchi : > And to tie back other parts of the conversation into this thread, Gus > posted his thought as a Wiki page here >

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

And to tie back other parts of the conversation into this thread, Gus posted his thought as a Wiki page here and it's quite a read. My key take away is that we can drive participation more by encouraging people to

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

On 02.10.2015, at 20:17, Kohsuke Kawaguchi wrote: > My key take away is that we can drive participation more by encouraging > people to sign up and create an account, which converts them from anonymous > drive-by visitors into a "card carrying member of the Jenkins

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

Wasn't sure exactly where discussion on the individual issues should go so I stuck a comment in the website issue. If it was better to stick it on the mailing list or wiki then please let me know. Cheers Richard On Wed, 30 Sep 2015 3:40 pm R. Tyler Croy wrote: > (replies

Re: [2.0] Website rebump

(replies inline) On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Kohsuke Kawaguchi wrote: > I'm pulling out the website change part of the Jenkins 2.0 proposal from the > mega thread > here to > go a bit deeper on it. Reiterating the link that KK

[2.0] Website rebump

I'm pulling out the website change part of the Jenkins 2.0 proposal from the mega thread here to go a bit deeper on it. I talked to Gus Reiber, who is the only web design guy that I know of in this community, to walk me through