>I'd propose that at least for short-term we continue with last summer >action to upgrade website to the latest Aida. Then I namely managed to >migrate most of it already, maybe a day or two is yet needed to finish >that part. >This way Chris can have a time to continue work on a new website. At >least on the new design and content if not the complete one. Newest Aida >6.5 namely supports Twitter Bootstrap CSS framework used for the new >design, so we can adopt the new design easily, if needed.That sounds like a plan. I believe we are both the head of the Web Team, so let's proceed. Let's replace the current Aida with a newer version. The prototype I made has only has one advantage, which is Bootstrap, which Aida already has. I envision the current Aida homepage with the carousel from my prototype. Clearly some thought needs to go into how those two would fit together. We will have more visual continuity by staying with the design we have now. Though, lots of links need to be removed or updated in the current site. It might be easier to use RFB in the image and not use external VNC. I recommend adding Ian's RFB to the Aida image, so members of the Web Team can control/reboot RFB problems themselves. Let me download Aida/Scribo and play with it for a week and perhaps we could follow up. Thanks, Chris |
Dne 07. 03. 2013 17:26, piše Chris Cunnington:
>>I'd propose that at least for short-term we continue with last summer >>action to upgrade website to the latest Aida. Then I namely managed to >>migrate most of it already, maybe a day or two is yet needed to finish >>that part. > >>This way Chris can have a time to continue work on a new website. At >>least on the new design and content if not the complete one. Newest Aida >>6.5 namely supports Twitter Bootstrap CSS framework used for the new >>design, so we can adopt the new design easily, if needed. > > That sounds like a plan. I believe we are both the head of the Web Team, > so let's proceed. > > Let's replace the current Aida with a newer version. The prototype I > made has only has one advantage, which is Bootstrap, which Aida already > has. I envision the current Aida homepage with the carousel from my > prototype. Clearly some thought needs to go into how those two would fit > together. > > We will have more visual continuity by staying with the design we have > now. Though, lots of links need to be removed or updated in the current > site. What if you simply continue with design on Altitude because you are already accustomed of it. That way you'll come to the final design faster than learning Aida first. In the meantime I'll migrate the current wesite to newest Aida. Later we can simply migrate design (and content) from Altitude to Aida. Janko > It might be easier to use RFB in the image and not use external VNC. I > recommend adding Ian's RFB to the Aida image, so members of the Web Team > can control/reboot RFB problems themselves. > > Let me download Aida/Scribo and play with it for a week and perhaps we > could follow up. > > Thanks, > Chris > > > -- Janko Mivšek Svetovalec za informatiko Eranova d.o.o. Ljubljana, Slovenija www.eranova.si tel: 01 514 22 55 faks: 01 514 22 56 gsm: 031 674 565 |
I know it's a question of pride to have the homepage of a programming language done in said language but these cycles of "rewrite in technology X/abandonment/how do we update the site again?" are pretty silly. Is the anything on the website that's actually benefiting from having a smalltalk implementation? Why not just slap a wordpress or any of the zillion externally maintained cms systems on the server and be done with it? It should be the content that counts.
rado
On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 10:48 AM, Janko Mivšek <[hidden email]> wrote: Dne 07. 03. 2013 17:26, piše Chris Cunnington: |
On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 4:22 PM, radoslav hodnicak <[hidden email]> wrote: I know it's a question of pride to have the homepage of a programming language done in said language but these cycles of "rewrite in technology X/abandonment/how do we update the site again?" are pretty silly. Is the anything on the website that's actually benefiting from having a smalltalk implementation? Why not just slap a wordpress or any of the zillion externally maintained cms systems on the server and be done with it? It should be the content that counts. So you're saying that instead of rewriting it in Smalltalk, we should rewrite it in PHP? Bear in mind that it isn't just a bunch of static pages—it's not hugely sophisticated, but it's not trivial either. No matter what we do, it'll take some time and effort to update and maintain. Personally I'd rather do that work in a language that doesn't make my eyes bleed. Perhaps the web team feels the same.
Colin |
I don't know what's in the admin backend but the only non-static things I see on the current homepage are stats and search, both of which could be handed off to Google. I imagine duplicating the current site would require zero or close to zero PHP programming, you'd "just" import the articles into a cms.
If the web team thinks it's fun to build the technology as well as the content then fine. I'd rather not reinvent the wheel for the Xth time and spend that time elsewhere, but then again I'm not the web team. Carry on.
rado
On Sat, Mar 9, 2013 at 1:50 AM, Colin Putney <[hidden email]> wrote:
|
Hi guys,
Content is our main problem, not a technology behind te website. We really need someone to rewrite it into something nicer, more modern, simpler, and correct. Next step is a new design. Here some professional designer is IMHO needed. Or we can borrow designs from other CMS guys, which can be then adapted to our CMSes. I agree with Colin that our website is not so complex yet not so easy to be handled with out-of-the box CMS without additional tweaking. And staying in Smalltalk have obvious advantages. It is true we don't have all those components ready to integrate as Joomla, Wordpress... Here is the biggest disadvantage of our CMS offerings and it will always be. But except those pletora of out-of-the-box modules we can do whatever we like quite easily comparing to other CMSes. Last but not least: running such website is, yes, a Smalltalker's pride, but more important: it is an opportunity to advance our web technology as well. Best regards Janko Dne 09. 03. 2013 02:14, piše radoslav hodnicak: > I don't know what's in the admin backend but the only non-static things > I see on the current homepage are stats and search, both of which could > be handed off to Google. I imagine duplicating the current site would > require zero or close to zero PHP programming, you'd "just" import the > articles into a cms. > > If the web team thinks it's fun to build the technology as well as the > content then fine. I'd rather not reinvent the wheel for the Xth time > and spend that time elsewhere, but then again I'm not the web team. > Carry on. > > rado > > On Sat, Mar 9, 2013 at 1:50 AM, Colin Putney <[hidden email] > <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 4:22 PM, radoslav hodnicak <[hidden email] > <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote: > > I know it's a question of pride to have the homepage of a > programming language done in said language but these cycles of > "rewrite in technology X/abandonment/how do we update the site > again?" are pretty silly. Is the anything on the website that's > actually benefiting from having a smalltalk implementation? Why > not just slap a wordpress or any of the zillion externally > maintained cms systems on the server and be done with it? It > should be the content that counts. > > > So you're saying that instead of rewriting it in Smalltalk, we > should rewrite it in PHP? > > Bear in mind that it isn't just a bunch of static pages—it's not > hugely sophisticated, but it's not trivial either. No matter what we > do, it'll take some time and effort to update and maintain. > Personally I'd rather do that work in a language that doesn't make > my eyes bleed. Perhaps the web team feels the same. > > Colin > > > > > > > -- Janko Mivšek Aida/Web Smalltalk Web Application Server http://www.aidaweb.si |
Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |