4 ms·

Looks good. I think I should point out that the current version of python.org is actually pretty decent in the scheme of programming language/codebase sites (th

Looks good. I think I should point out that the current version of python.org is actually pretty decent in the scheme of programming language/codebase sites (there are some real eyesores out there!)

jnoller 14y ago
Yes while it may be better than some we can do all whole lot better and that's the goal
jnoller 14y ago
Just to add - a comparison to the lowest common denominator is not what we're after :)
- yen223 14y ago
  But he's right, the current Python website looks a lot better than some other websites coughPHPcoughGocough My 2 cents, I really like Nodejs's website. Closer to Python, I'm really digging the websites for the Pocoo packages (Flask, Jinja2 etc).
  - jnoller 14y ago
    No need to go site/language bashing :) We're going to make it look good, usable and a showcase for Python. Other language sites while good for "competitive analysis" aren't needed to make ours shine. Let's just stay civil
briancurtin 14y ago
We've heard this a lot, and I think many of us on the team do still have a soft spot for the current site. It has served us well over time, but it's really time to grow the site along with Python - the language, the community, and everything that goes with it. One of the biggest parts of this redesign is happening on the back end. One thing I look after on the site is the PSF board resolutions and minutes pages. Oh you see a typo in the latest page? Here's how you fix it: Get to machine that has the checkout > svn up > edit file > rebuild website locally > run webserver and check local instance > svn ci > wait for server cron job to catch the change and update the live site > confirm on live site That sucks. For me it's not unworkable because it's not far from what I do as a developer, but it's definitely a hassle more times than not. However, getting less technically savvy contributors is not very easy. We had an administrator who was tasked with updating the pages I look after, and this person didn't know what an SSH key was (not their fault). The whole thing became a non-starter. The new backend will continue to support the developer-like workflow (which really is good in some cases), and it'll support online editing which will be nice for a lot of things as well.

Looks good. I think I should point out that the current version of python.org is actually pretty decent in the scheme of programming language/codebase sites (there are some real eyesores out there!)

jnoller 14y ago

Yes while it may be better than some we can do all whole lot better and that's the goal

jnoller 14y ago

Just to add - a comparison to the lowest common denominator is not what we're after :)

yen223 14y ago
But he's right, the current Python website looks a lot better than some other websites coughPHPcoughGocough My 2 cents, I really like Nodejs's website. Closer to Python, I'm really digging the websites for the Pocoo packages (Flask, Jinja2 etc).
- jnoller 14y ago
  No need to go site/language bashing :) We're going to make it look good, usable and a showcase for Python. Other language sites while good for "competitive analysis" aren't needed to make ours shine. Let's just stay civil

briancurtin 14y ago

We've heard this a lot, and I think many of us on the team do still have a soft spot for the current site. It has served us well over time, but it's really time to grow the site along with Python - the language, the community, and everything that goes with it. One of the biggest parts of this redesign is happening on the back end. One thing I look after on the site is the PSF board resolutions and minutes pages. Oh you see a typo in the latest page? Here's how you fix it: Get to machine that has the checkout > svn up > edit file > rebuild website locally > run webserver and check local instance > svn ci > wait for server cron job to catch the change and update the live site > confirm on live site That sucks. For me it's not unworkable because it's not far from what I do as a developer, but it's definitely a hassle more times than not. However, getting less technically savvy contributors is not very easy. We had an administrator who was tasked with updating the pages I look after, and this person didn't know what an SSH key was (not their fault). The whole thing became a non-starter. The new backend will continue to support the developer-like workflow (which really is good in some cases), and it'll support online editing which will be nice for a lot of things as well.