On Wed, May 14, 2025 at 02:40:22PM -0400, Gregory Casamento wrote: > On Wed, May 14, 2025 at 13:48 Riccardo Mottola <[email protected]> > wrote: > We are not such, nor we compare directly with "gtk", but somehow a mix > between gtk and gnome. > > > How are we not like both of these? We are a dev environment and so are they.
Greg, please see my reply to Riccardo about the confusion over what GNUstep is. If two of the core developers can't articulate and agree on precisely what GNUstep is, it lacks a clear vision and purpose. >On Wed, May 14, 2025 at 04:11:33PM -0400, Gregory Casamento wrote: > Reasons to have developer.gnustep.org: > > 1) The developer site allows developers to easily go to one place for all > developer information > 2) It allows the main site to concentrate on the project itself and it's > current status, who uses it, who is involved, contacts, etc. > a) The main site can concentrate on releases and such, provide downloads. > 3) Can provide documentation along with clear examples in a place that people > can reach simply by typing the URL without having to wonder where to find it. >On Wed, May 14, 2025 at 06:47:40PM -0400, Gregory Casamento wrote: > The difference is... THE USER CAN MORE EASILY FIND THE LATTER BECAUSE IT IS A > PATTERN FOLLOWED BY OTHER PROJECTS. :) Greg's points are key here. Most new developers are going to look for this. > In the case we think subdomains are of use, I would rather gather a > documentation site. E.g. docs.gnustep.org with different kind of manuals > as well as reference documentation. > > > docs/deveveloper/dev whatever. Same thing. See my reply to Riccardo. I think they are slightly different, and we could ultimately use both to accomplish the goal of attracting and educating new developers. Part of the impasse here may be that no one but Ethan is really contributing to the developer.gnustep.org site. Ethan opened a thread not too long ago about this, and received zero responses. Maybe Ethan hasn't received much (if any) feedback because the readers of this mailing list don't like the proposed design or engine that is being used for the proposed developer portal (or because it isn't clear that the project is moving in this direction?). That principle when discussing the website design may apply here: the present focus should be on the content before the look. The engine that generates that portal can be debated at another time, but the content that will hopefully captivate the developer there should be the priority. The original PR thread resulted in an overall willingness to work on the the wiki and website content for now. Please see the thread "Wiki Updates" for where we are currently being hindered from collaborating on updating and fixing the wiki and website content. Perhaps we'll know when the developer/docs section is ready when Riccardo is impressed by the finished result. :) Sheesh, after typing out "developers" so much, I feel like I'm starting to sound like Steve Ballmer! -- Luke Lollard
