Riccardo, On Sat, May 17, 2025 at 01:21:28AM +0200, Riccardo Mottola wrote: > Luke Lollard wrote: > > This is one of the main roadblocks in this conversation. There are two > > parts to this: > > > > 1. This isn't about how you use the web, it's about how new developers > > use the web. > > Well, I also cited on how I see other use the web, like my younger > colleagues. They just search in google something, the domain is > completely irrelevant. The youngers may not even know why there is "www" > in front.... and browsers have removed displaying http after focing to > https... > > But I still think I can also cite my own experience, I will not be the > only one working that way.
> All young developer I know will just land on GitHub - Google/Bing > indexing also helps on that. You do make an interesting point. I wonder if app developers would be drawn more to the main website, and core developers (for lack of a better term; those who would work on the GNUstep libraries) would just look at GitHub. If that's the case, maybe we should look into improving the GitHub presence and market that for core devs, whereas the website could be geared more to app devs, with core devs as the secondary audience via a Developer portal. Can we get more feedback from those who work on GNUstep (not just use it to make apps)? Do y'all bother with the website, or just go straight to GitHub? > > 2. Whether it's a subdomain or not, that shouldn't matter. Maybe > > gnustep.org/developer just redirects to developer.gnustep.org. Either > > way, a developer "portal" is what new developers look for (also see my > > last comment). > I don't share your opinion, you did not buy me in. Checking many > projects was also a reality check for me on that. > at most I would make developer.gnustep.org redirect to gnustep.org/developer That sounds fine to me! > > I'm not sure if this was your point, but I find it difficult to use > > ready-made distro packages for GNUstep because almost all of the distro > > packages are woefully outdated. Building from the git repo has become > > necessary (though I'd prefer not to spend the time compiling this every > > time I need to test it) because there aren't enough developers and power > > users to help with the project. > > They aren't that outdated (nor do we develop so quickly). Not more > outdated than gtk/xfce! So if it is not an issue for them, why should it > be for us? Maybe we can revisit this in the future. At one time I was comparing distros and didn't think they were up-to-date, but I don't think it's worth arguing about this now. > > Why not docs.gnustep.org for the cleaned up and updated content from the > > wiki and developer.gnustep.org for the API reference? Developers can see > > a link to the docs section on the front page, then if they need the API > > reference, they can find it under the docs section? Think of the old Mac > > docsets: all of the developer info in one place and with the ability to > > keep an offline copy. > > > because I would but all documentation on docs, including reference, in > that case. Doc is Doc. > > Currently, it is a bit like you propose though. Despite other people's > writing, all documentation is reachable from one page, reachable from > one menu point one click away. > Specifically two pages: users vs. developer: > > https://www.gnustep.org/experience/documentation.html > https://www.gnustep.org/developers/documentation.html But then they redirect to the wiki, a separate site! :) I think we may be talking about the same thing, but not communicating about it in the same way. This is how I see the two: 1. Docs: primarily users and app developers 2. Developer: primarily app developers and core developers -- Luke Lollard
