Re: [Gimp-web] Check static.gimp.org

[Andrew Toskin <andrew tosk in>]

If we decide to rebuild the registry site from scratch, I think
WordPress would be *much* easier to set up than Drupal or Joomla, and
WordPress has pretty good spam filters via plugins officially sponsored
by Automattic, the company developing. There are a lot of web CMS
applications out there, but WordPress is by far the easiest to use
among the PHP/MySQL stacks, and still pretty versatile for web
development.
Either way, I think the GIMP Plugin Registry provides an important
service. We shouldn't let it fall to the wayside. 
On Sun, 2015-11-08 at 16:44 -0500, Kasim Ahmic wrote:
> The site looks great! I only have a few minor cosmetic concerns
> though:
>
> 1. The About GIMP, Documentation, Donations, Get Involved, and
> Tutorial links in the footer and menu bar don't have icons next to
> them. What's strange is that on the mobile version, the Documentation
> and Tutorials links both have icons. I personally think these would
> look nice:
>  - About GIMP: Not sure but maybe a question mark?
>  - Donations: A simple dollar sign
>  - Get Involved: A handshake
>
> 2. The images for the GIMP icon in the menu bar and footer are much
> lower quality than the other icons. I'm only looking at the site on
> my phone so I can't tell for sure but I'm gonna assume that the other
> icons are vectors whereas the GIMP icon is a bitmap image. Also, the
> icons for Scribus, Inkscape, and SwatchBooker should either be halved
> in size or replaced with higher DPI icons for hi-res devices. Perhaps
> do the same thing with the "Graphic Design Elements" and "Programming
> Algorithms" backgrounds but loading higher DPI images for those might
> start causing load issues for people on mobile devices so I don't
> think that's too important personally.
>
> 3. The Recent News title on the News page doesn't have a border and
> shadow underneath it like the Documentation, Tutorials, and other
> titles on their respective pages do.
>
> 4. The OpenHub activity tracker's design and style doesn't fit with
> the rest of the site. But that's just mostly color scheme and font.
>
> Other than that, everything else looks great!
>
> A far as the GIMP registry goes, part of me wants to preserve it and
> just update Drupal to the latest version (assuming it's backwards
> compatible) and hope it has better spam protection. But on the other
> hand, I'd like to see it redone entirely in a way that's built for
> spam protection from the group up. They both have their pros and
> cons:
>
> Fix the Current Site
> Pros:
>  - Should be relatively simple.
>  - No loss of plugins and posts.
>  - Current registry users won't have to learn a new system for
> posting plugins or responses.
>
> Cons:
>  - AFAIK, there's no real version control on Drupal making it
> difficult for users to find the version of a plugin their looking
> for.
>  - Potential for future problems due to old server configs.
>
> Create an All New Site
> Pros:
>  - We can rest assured spam won't be an issue.
>  - We can modify it to our and the users needs from the ground up.
>
> Cons:
>  - Will be a massive undertaking.
>  - Will have the need for moving over old plugins from the old site.
>
> Those are just my thoughts on it.
>
> Kasim Ahmic
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Nov 8, 2015, at 10:27 AM, Pat David <patdavid gmail com> wrote:
> >
> > Thank you for taking the time to provide feedback!
> >
> > > On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 4:37 PM yahvuu <yahvuu gmail com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On http://static.gimp.org/:
> > >   There is a typo in Section 'High Quality Photo Manipulation':
> > >       'GIMP provides the tools for needed for high quality image'
> > >                  (delete word)  -------^
> >
> > Awesome!  Thank you for that - fixed in 41b3f77
> >
> >
> > >   Things you might consider:
> > >     - Section 'Extensibility & Flexibility':
> > >       Add Link to http://registry.gimp.org/
> >
> >
> > I agree with adding this link to the section, but am not sure if we
> > should
> > hold off until we decide what we want to do with the registry (or
> > just go
> > ahead and link it, and let folks get the archived version until we
> > switch
> > things up).  The registry is in a poor state, and there's not much
> > we can
> > do about it from our end (old drupal install that is vulnerable to
> > spam).
> >
> > I was going to address some ideas in a separate thread on the ML
> > later at
> > some point and see what everyone thought.
> >
> >
> > >     - A new Section "Get Involved":
> > >       ~ "GIMP is a community project which is driven by
> > > volunteers with
> > > a wide range of interests and skills. Have a look how you can
> > > become
> > > part of the community" with link to gimp.org/develop/.  *)
> >
> > Great idea!  I'll have a look at integrating a section like
> > this.  Along
> > that same idea, we should probably have a look at cleaning up
> > /develop/ and
> > making it a bit cleaner, simpler, clearer?  We've already had a
> > couple of
> > commits for those pages, yay!
> >
> >
> > > On http://static.gimp.org/develop/
> > >   - Section "GIMP Development Links":
> > >
> > >     "Martin Nordholts’ GIMP Blog -- What happens in GIMP
> > > development."
> > >       ^--- The blog is not active anymore, this item can be
> > > deleted.
> >
> > I see that it's not active, though the information is still
> > archived
> > there.  Should we delete the link completely or mark it as inactive
> > and
> > leave the link to the old material?  I'm not sure on this and am
> > looking
> > for some guidance/opinions from those who know more than me. :)
> >
> > pat
> > _______________________________________________
> > gimp-web-list mailing list
> > gimp-web-list gnome org
> > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-web-list
> _______________________________________________
> gimp-web-list mailing list
> gimp-web-list gnome org
> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-web-list