We used to use IRC a long time ago, but we stopped when we switched to
gitter. We should probably close down the channel and remove the link to
the logs. I think we left them up because the logging service we used had a
requirement that we have a link to the logs on our website.
Aaron Meurer
On
I don't think the website has any major limitations. It's still pretty good
and definitely does the job. But it can still use some minor improvements.
Here are some of the things I think can be updated. The landing page looks
a little cluttered, we can clean that up a little bit. The last
I'm curious what you see as the limitations of the existing website? I
personally think our current website is fine. Maybe some of the content
could be improved or moved around a bit, but I don't know if that
necessitates a new static generator for it.
Aaron Meurer
On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 8:32
Nikhil,
I recommend creating some kind of survey with carefully crafted questions
to discover what the SymPy community (users and devs) might want in a
website upgrade. Maybe you can come up with 5 or 6 key questions that take
< 5 mins to complete to try to get a broad sampling of opinions and
Hey folks,
I would like to work on this as a NUMFOCUS grant project. What kind of
changes do we want in the website?
As for the static generators, in my experience, I found hugo to be simpler
and easier to use for everyone and it also has a vast library of themes
that we can use. The main
I think that using a static generator would have advantages from the
translation point-of-view as well.
On Wednesday, May 27, 2020 at 3:27:28 PM UTC-5, Aaron Meurer wrote:
>
> I think we can modify the backend, but we should be prepared as
> mentors to do the programming work. Conversely, I
I think we can modify the backend, but we should be prepared as
mentors to do the programming work. Conversely, I don't know if it
would make sense to make any changes without feedback from a technical
writer if we are going to get one, so I don't know if it makes sense
to do anything like this
It just gives an another reason to hurry up setting up the static web
framework.
Unfortunately, I don't think that it is possible to edit sympy.org than
messing with html files, besides the translations, so it will not be easy
for technical writers.
On Tuesday, May 26, 2020 at 1:20:01 AM
I 100% agree with Jason here. In fact, I would say that the mentors
should help do any programming/tooling related fixes that are needed
to support the GSoD technical writers. This makes GSoD a harder
program to mentor than GSoC.
Aaron Meurer
On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 11:51 AM Jason Moore wrote:
I think a GSOD spot would be better spent on working on content, not
tooling and other things. Its a key distinction in the GSoC and GSoD
programs. The docs program is supposed to be suitable for people that don't
necessarily have programming know how.
Jason
moorepants.info
+01 530-601-9791
On
It is a possibility. It mainly depends on what we would gain from doing so.
I would add that, at least in my opinion, our website isn't in too bad
of a state, especially compared to the NumPy site as it was before the
refactor. As a reminder, this is what it used to look like
I see numpy.org is now using hugo.
We may have consider changing the static site generator like
https://github.com/numpy/numpy.org/issues/29
On Tuesday, May 26, 2020 at 1:20:01 AM UTC+9, Jason Moore wrote:
>
> I was admiring the new NumPy website: https://numpy.org/ and thinking how
> some of
12 matches
Mail list logo
