Re: WebSite: navigation to bug reporting

[address@hidden]

Hi Riccardo,

> Am 22.02.2024 um 12:57 schrieb Riccardo Mottola <riccardo.mottola@libero.it>:
> 
> Hi Lars,
> 
> 
> lars.sonchocky-helldorf@hamburg.de wrote:
>> Some initial remarks first: I appreciate the effort you’re making to get us 
>> a better website. But I think before we lose ourselves in details of the 
>> menu structure, we should think about which audience we want to carter.
>> 
> 
> No, I don't want to stir up that question again. I made precise questions to 
> get answer about them, it was intentional.
> So, sorry, I will reply only to certain parts of your email, apologies in 
> advance. I did intentionally restrict the topic.
> 
>> Is it developers? Is it users? Is it both? Is it something to be discussed?
> 
> For me it is clear that we cater both... and I prefer not re-discussing this 
> to death again.
> The alternative would be to create two sites, but it would be worse in my 
> opinion, for what I will explain below.

If that is clear and everybody agrees, fine for me as well. Although I like to 
know if we have an „official“ position on this. I remember that in former times 
we said, that we are only a development environment. Perhaps I have missed a 
change here. What does our maintainer say? Greg?

> 
> Also, for this reason, parallels to GTK and GNOME have a limit, because they 
> have the two-site approach.

I am for just one site which caters both. But then again it would be possible 
to have a hybrid approach, where just gnustep.org is a landing page and two 
„sub sites“, let's say users.gnustep.org (or experience.gnustep.org if you 
prefer) and developers.gnustep.org which are also cross linked. While 
developers are most likely also users „dog feeding“ their own stuff, a sub site 
for users would be a good thing to have IMHO, since user have different needs 
than developers.

> 
>> I had a look and it looks improved compared to the current version at 
>> https://gnustep.github.io/ But I would refrain from renaming the menus „For 
>> Users“ and „For Developers“ to „Experience“ and just „Developers“.
> 
> Actually, it is the original wording which existed for years. I don't like 
> "For xxx" and it is a recent change I did not import back.
> While "Experience" and "Developers" is imperfect, "For Developers and "For 
> Users" always irritated me, I don't like menus with "For" and also strikes a 
> too tight line.
> 
>> 
>> „Experience“ is such a mushy word, it can mean everything and nothing at the 
>> same time, but definitely nothing I would click on. Also, if we want to 
>> carter to both users ands developers a the same time, I wouldn’t „hide“ this 
>> fact in such small menus which are easily overlooked but make it way more 
>> prominent.
> 
> It may be mushy, but it is definitely more correct than "For Users". The 
> idea, is that there you find information to "Use" GNUstep and also 
> information about the project. Something summed up with "Experience" (word 
> which has been in use by a dozen of years in the site, much before my 
> redesign).
> A "normal" end-user might not be interested in the developer section, but a 
> developer should be interested in the experience section.
> A developer should be informed about the project scope, applications, design, 
> etc.
> Like two levels, the first is only for the end-user, but the second builds on 
> the first level.
> 
> Perhaps, the wrong menu name is actually "Developers".. maybe more a word in 
> line with "Development".

Hence the „for Developers“ which is meant as an abbreviation of „GNUstep for 
Developers“. Just „Development“ could be mistaken of development of GNUstep 
itself (although developers for GNUstep itself are needed as much as 
Application developers).

> 
> 
> 
>> 
>> While I understand what you want to express with „External“ I think it is 
>> totally unclear what it means in this context. External what? Maybe use 
>> „External Resources“. Also, I think it is completely irrelevant to the user 
>> whether those stuff listed there is external to the website, it is not 
>> „external“ to the project.
> 
> They are not really external resources... and names should be short too.
> It contains references to various part of the project, but also to "external 
> to gnustep.org" since other projects use gnustep, but are not "gnustep.org"
> 
> I said that "External" is not meaningful nowadays. Essentially it is really 
> "More" or "Misc" but I hate to admit that.
> I don't want to split up things further

While those desktop environments are really somewhat separate from GNUstep (I 
wish they weren’t or we should at least have some sort of „reference 
implementation“), other things like the GitHub repo or the bugs section aren’t 
„external“. Maybe „Related“ or „related to GNUstep“ is a good wording here …

> 
>> 
>> „encouraging discovery“ doesn’t work if you ask me, our website shouldn’t be 
>> an adventure game. Instead this mostly leads to visitors leaving the page.
> 
> You interpret it wrong. Most site I use daily go this route, maybe my wording 
> did convey the wrong concept to you.
> Instead of reading long texts to find something, you look for menus or 
> navigation items.

My opinion to, to long, unstructured texts are a bad thing (in Germany we say 
„Bleiwüste“ to this). But hidden stuff is also not the best. The most important 
things should be visible at a glance.

> Many sites are done this way, also professional stuff I use for work. You 
> find in the menu things like payments, downloads and such.
> It just feels natural and people are accustomed to explore, click around.
> Like you don't read a manual when using an App, just... "discover it" because 
> things have expected names, places, icons...
> 
> It can be taken to the extreme like in www.netbsd.org, where you access 
> everything from the navigation menu at left.
> Also the gnome.org site you cited is a comprompise between. E.g. you find the 
> "Donate" only in the bar, not in the text, as the technologies used are just 
> one-click in the menu, not in the text.
> 
> 
>> 
>> I hope you consider my critique not as harsh or unfriendly. I am trying to 
>> find the weaknesses in our current approach towards a good solution for 
>> GNUstep as a whole.
> 
> Nothing harsh.. it happens that we disagree on certain things and perhaps 
> just misunderstood on others. But there is alot of personal experience and 
> taste involved.

That makes me feel better. I sometimes miss the right tone, also, because I am 
not a native English speaker.

> 
>> 
>> If you don’t like this, please let me know!
> 
> No problem with discussion, I read and evaluate. But you did not actually 
> give answers to some of my questions. That's all :)
> 
> Peace,
> 
> Riccardo
> 

Kind regards,

        Lars