Ruby-lang.org redesign?


#1

Guys,

Last year, I remember seeing an impressive redesign of ruby-lang.org
(http://redhanded.hobix.com/redesign2005). However, no mention since
last May, and no switchover. I really think this new design would be a
boon to the community. Anyone know what happened?

Thanks,
B.A.

B.A. Baracus: I thought you weren’t crazy no more?
Murdock: Only on paper.


#2

On Jun 12, 2006, at 10:23 PM, BA Baracus wrote:

Guys,

Last year, I remember seeing an impressive redesign of ruby-lang.org
(http://redhanded.hobix.com/redesign2005). However, no mention since
last May, and no switchover. I really think this new design would be a
boon to the community. Anyone know what happened?

There has been mention of the site on this list quite recently
actually. We’re in the latter stages of content import and creation
now. You can browse the largely functional site at:

http://new.ruby-lang.org/

James Edward G. II


#3

have a look at http://new.ruby-lang.org

I don’t know if it’s the same re-design, but it’s certainly different
from
ruby-lang.org


#4

That’s hot.


#5

On Tuesday, June 13, 2006, at 3:40 PM, Nathaniel B. wrote:

That’s hot.

It is hot…I wonder if the effort is dead? Will this new look every
replace the current version?

Anyone?


#6

On 6/13/06, BA Baracus removed_email_address@domain.invalid wrote:

On Tuesday, June 13, 2006, at 3:40 PM, Nathaniel B. wrote:

That’s hot.

It is hot…I wonder if the effort is dead? Will this new look every
replace the current version?

Anyone?

The webmaster has been responsive if sent corrections or content for
the new site.

What might help though is if there were a “this site’s current status”
page describing the timeline, what’s being worked on, what’s needed,
and so on.


#7

On Jun 13, 2006, at 9:11 AM, John G. wrote:

What might help though is if there were a “this site’s current status”
page describing the timeline, what’s being worked on, what’s needed,
and so on.

I would rather have us spending our energy finishing the site than
talking about finishing the site. :wink:

Be patient just a little longer now folks. We’re really very close
now…

James Edward G. II


#8

On Jun 13, 2006, at 8:47 AM, BA Baracus wrote:

On Tuesday, June 13, 2006, at 3:40 PM, Nathaniel B. wrote:

That’s hot.

It is hot…I wonder if the effort is dead? Will this new look every
replace the current version?

Anyone?

See my first reply to you:

http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-talk/196958

James Edward G. II


#9

On Wednesday, June 14, 2006, at 12:11 AM, James Edward G. II wrote:

See my first reply to you:

http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-talk/196958

Woops…sorry…read too fast. Great! I’m very much looking forward to
it going live.

B.A.


#10

At 20:26 13.06.2006, BA Baracus wrote:

Posted with http://DevLists.com. Sign up and save your mailbox.
Try not to jump into the same shoe as FreeBSD. They rushed into
a new website so fast that once they got there, they realized it
wasn’t that nice after all.

Speaking as a graduate from the Royal Academy of Arts in London,
the current Ruby website looks far better than the new one.
The new one looks to me like a badly designed approach to the
whole web 2.0 hype. As they say, if you can’t do it, don’t.

All the best,
Kyrre


#11

I wouldn’t say the new site looks bad, but I don’t like when the page
doesn’t expand to fill my monitor. In this regard the old ruby site is
superior. I actually really like the current ruby site.

-steven


#12

On Tuesday 13 June 2006 1:14 pm, Kyrre N. wrote:

Speaking as a graduate from the Royal Academy of Arts in London,
the current Ruby website looks far better than the new one.
The new one looks to me like a badly designed approach to the
whole web 2.0 hype. As they say, if you can’t do it, don’t.

Just as professionals in every other area have disagreements, I imagine
that
your opinion here differs from that of the designer responsible for the
new
site’s look.

However, I would be curious to hear a more detailed, specific criticism
of
what you see as bad in the new site design.

Kirk H.


#13

On Wednesday, June 14, 2006, at 12:11 AM, James Edward G. II wrote:

See my first reply to you:

http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-talk/196958

Woops…sorry…read too fast. Great! I’m very much looking forward to
it going live.

B.A.


#14

On 6/13/06, Kyrre N. removed_email_address@domain.invalid wrote:

Speaking as a graduate from the Royal Academy of Arts in London,
the current Ruby website looks far better than the new one.
The new one looks to me like a badly designed approach to the
whole web 2.0 hype. As they say, if you can’t do it, don’t.

Speaking as a Web 2.0 Ruby coding non-college graduate ex- drywall
hanger extraordinaire…

I completely disagree with your statement.
http://new.ruby-lang.org/en/ is definitely an improvement over
http://ruby-lang.org/en/. Anyone could see that, art academy degree
or not.


#15

On Jun 13, 2006, at 2:14 PM, Kyrre N. wrote:

Speaking as a graduate from the Royal Academy of Arts in London,
the current Ruby website looks far better than the new one.
The new one looks to me like a badly designed approach to the
whole web 2.0 hype.

How does a comment like this constructively help all the people who
are sacrificing free-time to make this new site happen? Please,
think before you make light of their efforts.

As they say, if you can’t do it, don’t.

We look forward to your CSS submissions.

James Edward G. II


#16

Greg D. wrote:

http://new.ruby-lang.org/en/ is definitely an improvement over
http://ruby-lang.org/en/.

+1

The new site looks very professional. Functionality
problems, if any, will surely be worked out in time.

Speaking as the author of some of the worst looking
websites on the planet (with some of the best
content), I admit to being extraordinarily jealous.
:_)


#17

On 6/13/06, James Edward G. II removed_email_address@domain.invalid wrote:

On Jun 13, 2006, at 2:14 PM, Kyrre N. wrote:

As they say, if you can’t do it, don’t.

We look forward to your CSS submissions.

James, can you provide a link to where possible contributors might
grab the site source via anon cvs/svn?

—John


#18

On Jun 13, 2006, at 11:13 AM, James Edward G. II wrote:

I would rather have us spending our energy finishing the site than
talking about finishing the site. :wink:

Thanks for all your efforts.

I was looking at the Japanese version of the site and
noticed that ‘Ruby’ appeared in Latin script in the middle
of the Japanese script. I was just curious as to what
convention leads to that occurrence. I would have expected
there to be a Kanji, Hiragana, or Katakana character for ‘ruby’
(based on my 30 second reading of the Wikipedia entry for Japanese
Writing System).

Gary W.


#19

On Jun 13, 2006, at 4:06 PM, John G. wrote:

On 6/13/06, James Edward G. II removed_email_address@domain.invalid wrote:

On Jun 13, 2006, at 2:14 PM, Kyrre N. wrote:

As they say, if you can’t do it, don’t.

We look forward to your CSS submissions.

James, can you provide a link to where possible contributors might
grab the site source via anon cvs/svn?

Hmm. The site is in a database and served up by the Radiant CMS.

What specifically are you after? We’ll consider providing reasonable
access post launch, if we can easily and safely do so…

James Edward G. II


#20

On 6/13/06, James Edward G. II removed_email_address@domain.invalid wrote:

On Jun 13, 2006, at 4:06 PM, John G. wrote:

James, can you provide a link to where possible contributors might
grab the site source via anon cvs/svn?

Hmm. The site is in a database and served up by the Radiant CMS.

What specifically are you after?

I thought that if folks had the various source files, then it would be
easier for contributors to make small tweaks (including technical or
spelling/grammar corrections) and then patches. I’d be more inclined
to send a patch containing a few small fixes to one file, rather than
copying/pasting html from my browser into an email message. That makes
more work for everyone, IMO.

For example, the “About” page. The 2nd paragraph could possibly use
some re-wording as well as a link to a page containing the text of the
Ruby license. There might also be small corrections further down the
page that someone might want to make (like fixing the quoting around
the “variable declarations” bullet item).

I guess no source is needed if folks are experimenting with their own
stylesheets though…

Thanks,
—John