On 12/21/2015 08:58 AM, anonymous wrote:
> On 19.12.2015 15:33, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
>> http://www.googledrive.com/host/0B7UtafxGD9vESlB3aFBxcjNPOXM
>
> I know you wait for Walter's and Andrei's approval on this before
> investing more work. That's very reasonable. Luckily, I'm not so
> reasonable ;)
>
> http://d-ag0aep6g.rhcloud.com/
>
> On GitHub if people want to play around with it:
> https://github.com/aG0aep6G/dlang.org/tree/Ivan-Smirnov's-redesign
>
> That's a full clone of dlang.org in the new style. I just pasted it over
> the old style, and hacked around on top of it until it worked, more or
> less. It's a quick and dirty showcase. I touched everything, but
> polished nothing. There are more rough edges than smooth ones.
>
> I changed various details from the mock-up (logo, icons, text, ...), so
> this is not a perfect port. In particular, I tried not to throw out
> content and features from the current dlang.org. For now, that is. The
> home page is pretty crowded, and the menu bar definitely needs to be
> streamlined.
>
> By the way, I'm not sold on that font. I think I'd prefer a sans-serif.

Nice! A few questions.

What are the changes to the tooling used and the build process?

Is there a reasonable decay if javascript is disabled?

Can we defer any changes to the logo so we don't get sidetracked in this? Just scale the existing logo to fit and defer any changes to it to later.


Thanks,

Andrei

On Monday, 21 December 2015 at 13:58:30 UTC, anonymous wrote:
> I know you wait for Walter's and Andrei's approval on this before investing more work. That's very reasonable. Luckily, I'm not so reasonable ;)
>
> http://d-ag0aep6g.rhcloud.com/

Huh, that's mildly buggy but I'm actually pretty impressed with it.

If it was my decision, I think I'd greenlight this then do a few little tweaks myself on staging.

On 21.12.2015 15:13, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> What are the changes to the tooling used and the build process?

Uh, none? I'm not sure if I understand the question. It's just DDoc, CSS, etc, as usual.

> Is there a reasonable decay if javascript is disabled?

I guess, we'd set up dedicated pages as alternatives for the drop-down menus. They could be copies of the little overview snippets from the home page, or just lists of links.

> Can we defer any changes to the logo so we don't get sidetracked in
> this? Just scale the existing logo to fit and defer any changes to it to
> later.

Fine with me.

Does that mean you are principally on board with this, save for details like the logo?

On Monday, 21 December 2015 at 14:46:23 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> On Monday, 21 December 2015 at 13:58:30 UTC, anonymous wrote:
>> I know you wait for Walter's and Andrei's approval on this before investing more work. That's very reasonable. Luckily, I'm not so reasonable ;)
>>
>> http://d-ag0aep6g.rhcloud.com/
>
> Huh, that's mildly buggy but I'm actually pretty impressed with it.

Unfortunately it's buggy, like for example in 1024x768px it doesn't looks good:

http://i.imgur.com/obCcWyd.png

JohnCK.

On Monday, 21 December 2015 at 05:14:34 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
> Worth noting that this design modifies the logo, which Walter vetoed during the previous redesign.

I don't want to be harsh with Walter, but I think he should minding with language design.

You know... look that all companies change their logos from time to time, but trying to get a 21s layout with a 90s logo doesn't sound good.

JohnCK.

On Monday, 21 December 2015 at 15:01:16 UTC, JohnCK wrote:
> Unfortunately it's buggy, like for example in 1024x768px it doesn't looks good:

Yeah, the header wraps on my computer on 1280 too, but these are mild bugs that can be fixed with a little css adjustment.

On 21.12.2015 15:46, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> Huh, that's mildly buggy but I'm actually pretty impressed with it.

It's definitely very buggy. This is nowhere near releasable quality. I put this up so that we have a better preview of the thing. I always feel like mock-ups glance over the pain points.

On Monday, 21 December 2015 at 14:54:45 UTC, anonymous wrote:
> I guess, we'd set up dedicated pages as alternatives for the drop-down menus. They could be copies of the little overview snippets from the home page, or just lists of links.

Dedicated pages is a good idea and can be done trivially with ddoc macros to avoid repetition of the content in the source.

It could also be a css :hover dropdown instead of JS, but I hate drop downs on hover so I'd prefer the dedicated pages.

On Monday, 21 December 2015 at 15:07:05 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> On Monday, 21 December 2015 at 15:01:16 UTC, JohnCK wrote:
>> Unfortunately it's buggy, like for example in 1024x768px it doesn't looks good:
>
> Yeah, the header wraps on my computer on 1280 too, but these are mild bugs that can be fixed with a little css adjustment.

Yes but there are other problems like the code example on the right, with was wrapped and the space left in middle (Bellow the Download and ChangeLog).

JohnCK.

On 2015-12-21 14:40, wobbles wrote:

> On that - have you had any contact / discussion with Walter and/or
> Andrei about this?

No, I just put this out there to see what happens.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg