Re: PostgreSQL website redesign
От | Thom Brown |
---|---|
Тема | Re: PostgreSQL website redesign |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAA-aLv5MgOkcg1myVMrTDH=EMmt_TcQHh=dsR3pPByVoE-HDRQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: PostgreSQL website redesign (Josh Kupershmidt <schmiddy@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-www |
On 19 November 2011 23:47, Josh Kupershmidt <schmiddy@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 7:10 PM, Thom Brown <thom@linux.com> wrote: >> So with that, I'd like to open this topic for discussion. > > First, thanks for taking an interest in this. Here's my $0.02. > > The website is in sore need of attention, but a large-scale redesign > of the look-and-feel (which is what your description sounds like > you're angling for -- correct me if I'm mistaken) isn't what's most > needed. Large-scale redesign is probably overstating the changes. Our site isn't huge, and there's probably only a handful of types of page. > IMHO, basic maintenance issues are more pressing. For example, why do > we keep out-of-date information about defunct alpha/beta releases > http://www.postgresql.org/developer/alpha Already addressed. The new code for the site just hasn't been launched yet. > hanging around? Or much worse, the recently-discussed problem with > subscribing to the mailing lists, which from a post a few days ago on > -hackers sounds like it's still broken. That's got to be a *huge* > turnoff to a potential new member of the community, when just signing > up for the list hangs and appears broken. Never heard of that problem, but that's a matter for the web team. > A few adjustments to the docs pages could go a long way. (I read the > Postgres docs online extensively, so I have admittedly strong feelings > about this area). The layout (i.e. CSS) of the pages themselves is > decent enough. I'd like to see cross-links between the /static/ and > /interactive/ pages. I'd also like to see cross-links between the docs > pages to the other versions (e.g. the 9.0 version of the UPDATE page > should also link to 9.1 and perhaps 8.4, 8.3, and 9.2). The Django > docs handle this nicely. This would likely also help the > Google-ability of doc pages for newly-released versions. Like I've said previously, this is more a content issue. The design can be made with such functionality in mind, but the designer wouldn't implement such changes. > And comments posted to the doc pages from version X.Y should be > visible on the corresponding doc page for version A.B. I like the PHP > docs in this regard, though they don't break out their docs by > version. (Assuming posting comments on the web docs still works at > all.. I have a dim memory of posted comments disappearing). Again, another issue/feature request for the web team. Thom
В списке pgsql-www по дате отправления: