[Gimp-web] proposal for new site structure

[Sven Neumann]

Hi,

On Fri, 2007-03-09 at 01:05 +0000, Ronnie Tucker wrote:

> You have a point there but still, people shouldn't really need to jump through 
> hoops to be able to offer a little help. Every little helps. Just having an 
> email address that would give a quick response would be enough... ?

Who is supposed to handle these emails? Do you even have a vague idea
how much support requests, frequently asked questions and spam such an
email account would get? We don't have people in a support center that
are being paid to handle such junk.

> > Currently you can at least checkout the web-site from Subversion, build
> > it locally, edit pages and prepare patches. Something that you probably
> > won't be able to do if we switch to a more dynamic CMS.
> 
> My fault, I didn't realise your site was already a CMS. Sorry...

I think that it might help to look at the current web site, also from a
technical point of view, before you propose a replacement.

> Using the CMS you have, redesigning the graphics and updating the information, 
> here's the structure i was thinking of (with some brief notes) :
> 
> index/News
> (latest news from developers etc)
> 
> 	Screens
> 	(grabs of current and future versions)
> 
> 	Features
> 	(list main features of GIMP by pointing out relevant buttons on the GIMP 
> toolbar(s)
> 		Gimp in Film (etc)
> 
> 	History
> 	(would replace About and include History sections in one page)
> 
> 	Downloads
> 	(one page with anchors to each edition)
> 		Source
> 		Linux/Unix
> 		Windows
> 		MacOSX
> 
> 	Documentation
> 	(help files, online documentation etc)
> 		Books
> 		Tutorials
> 		(have screens of what each tutorial will accomplish)
> 		Mailing Lists
> 		(update current info)
> 
> 	Get Involved
> 	(point to mailing lists, webmaster email, IRC, hacking, development, 
> documentation)
> 		Donating
> 		Bug Reports
> 		GIMP Goods
> 		(include images of the products) 
> 
> 	Links
> 	(organise links here and from other pages)

Thanks for the nice proposal. Looks good to me.

> Sorry for the misunderstanding, with no visible login page or php pages I just 
> (foolishly, I admit) assumed that the pages were all basic HTML and probably 
> created from a template.

Did I say that they aren't? I also did not say that we should continue
to use our current system. I don't like it very much either. But it
would be worthwhile to look at it and realise the pros and cons. One of
the good things of the current system is that the content on the
web-server is static. That has proven to make it a lot easier to keep
the server going whenever GIMP ends up being discussed on slashdot and
similar sites.


Sven