Re: Two sides.

[Gregory Leblanc <gleblanc cu-portland edu>]

> After looking at Ryan Muldoon's <rpmuldoon students wisc edu> "initial
> structure ideas" (Thursday, November 16, 2000 9:17 PM) and Owen Taylor's
> <otaylor redhat com> "Intro and thoughts" (Friday, November 17, 2000 12:17
> AM) I had some fundamental questions about the intention of the Gnome web
> page.
> 
> Is the whole thing for the developer? Does Gnome want the responsibility of
> reaching the common user? Do/will we abdicate that function to HelixCode or
> Easel?


Eazel is not GNOME.  Helixcode is not GNOME.  I feel quite strongly
about this, and I think that we absolutely should not "abdicate"
anything to the corporations that contribute to GNOME.

> If Gnome really DOES want to reach the non-technical user, I make a motion
> that we split the site into two sides, the front for a new user and the back
> for everything else.


The site is already split.  www.gnome.org is for our end users, and for
all future computer users in general.  developer.gnome.org, and the GTK
sites, are for developers.  


> It seems to me that we have a *ton* of stuff that belongs under developer
> and much less for the common user. Frankly, I believe that we need to make
> the front of the Gnome site understandable enough so that even my mother can
> find recipe software, download it and leave. If she needs some help, that
> should be accessible, too. Perhaps a separate user posting space, news, and
> mail archive would be desirable for them someday, too, but split off
> everything into Developer that would confuse her. Call it the Steve's Mom
> rule if you like. I feel like 751010320030f what www.gnome.org presents right now
> is developer related and only confuses the other 25 2.869331or my mom.  ;)


I haven't really taken a good look at the content there, but the GDP is
probably one of the best groups of people to talk to if we're looking
for more end-user content.  Their entire job is to write material that
the end user can understand. 

> With two halves, folks like me can contribute to the content of the front
> end without being developers. I'm excited about enabling others to learn
> about our environment. We can advocate, help, draw, document, and explain,
> while developers can contribute tons of raw docs to the backend without
> having to worry about re-formatting documentation or confusing my mom. This
> also creates a processing system for content. Raw and complex deliveries are
> stored in the warehouse with selective refinement and marketing of portions
> for the marketing types.


Do you feel you can't do this now?  I don't see any problems with this
as things stand, but that could be just my point of view.

> Ok, so there may be concerns about duplication on both sides. I like to
> think that user stuff, once well written, doesn't need to be updated as
> frequently and is more macro than the other. It doesn't have to reflect the
> latest features, or upcoming architectural changes. Just a general picture
> of each project. If a project isn't mature enough to be explained here, it
> probably isn't appropriate for a user type anyway.


What specificly are you talking about here?  Latest features of what?

> On the other hand, developer information probably should value immediacy
> over format. But there's no reason that the two can't be connected. After
> all, isn't that what Al Gore had in mind when he invented they hyperlink?
> Whatever Developer ends up looking like is fine with me; I just want the
> front and user pages to simply present our desktop to a Windows user in all
> the glory that it is! (Is that too much to ask of our site with volunteer
> labor?)


I tend to think that with a little bit of work, we can create a site
that is both very functional, and very nice looking.  Right now,
www.gnome.org looks nice, but it's rather a pain to
use.  developer.gnome.org is really easy to use, but it looks like
crap.  I'd like to see both a consistent appearance, and a consistent
navigation method across [www developer].gnome.org, and across the GTK
sites (I think Shawn said that he'd like gtk.org integrated).  I'll fire
off a few more ideas before I disappear for a week, and we'll see what
you folks find while I'm gone.  Later,

    Greg