Website renovation

[cdbc]

Hi
@marcov: +1
Regards Benny

[440bx]

I don't see that. I even have to scroll just to see the "news" on the frontpage. Also it is a mess with a toplevel (python/pipy/jobs) menu bar, slightly lower a dropdown menu bar, and then another freight of links at the bottom.

I know it is a common layout, but IMHO it suffers from trying to link too much from the primary page.

I have no doubt there is room for improvement in the Python web page but, compared to the current Free Pascal webpage, it's way better.

The current web page:

The overview is a very long run-on sentence that has to be picked apart to determine if the compiler targets the platform the reader is interested in.

The "latest news", which occupies about 80% of the page, starts with a 1 year old entry and is followed by one that is 3 years old.  Good thing that's the latest news otherwise, we'd be reading about Christopher Columbus there and, these "fresh news" are supposedly more important than the system requirements which are found way at the bottom of the page, not to mention the current version, a list of features etc but, that's obviously not as important was what happened in 2018, 2019, 2020, etc, etc.  I don't see how these news are more important to someone checking out Free Pascal than the features and the system requirements (among other things.)

The python landing page may not be perfect but, it's quite an improvement over the current situation.

[marcov]

The overview is a very long run-on sentence that has to be picked apart to determine if the compiler targets the platform the reader is interested in.

The "latest news", which occupies about 80% of the page, starts with a 1 year old entry and is followed by one that is 3 years old. 

Both are content update issues, and have nothing to do with the layout of the site.

[440bx]

Both are content update issues, and have nothing to do with the layout of the site.

I can agree with that but, as far as the layout, I think it's about as plain, unimaginative, unattractive and lacking in functionality as it gets. 

Here is another point about the layout.  An attentive reader that takes the time to go through the "latest news" sees that FPC has not had an update in over 4 years.  Honestly, if I were an individual looking into Pascal and saw a compiler had not had a release in 4 years, not even for bug fixes, I'd likely conclude that I'm looking at a compiler that is dying.  This not a way to attract new people.

I don't want anyone here to get me wrong, 1. I love Pascal, 2. I am extremely grateful for FPC's existence and 3. for the dedication of those who develop it but, I cannot allow those facts to be a reason to ignore some significant problems (the layout of the site and the no release in 4 years.)

While I'm at it I want to express my gratitude for Lazarus existence too.  Particularly its debugger and facility to develop reasonably capable macros.

Conclusion: I find very doubtful that the current Free Pascal website attracts newcomers, on the contrary, I suspect it may cause some potential users to look elsewhere.

[Thaddy]

Conclusion: I find very doubtful that the current Free Pascal website attracts newcomers, on the contrary, I suspect it may cause some potential users to look elsewhere.

Disagree. Shouty websites are not really my thing. Much better is quite and calm and as much as possible also static.
To me a website that uses too much interactivity is a website that misses its purpose regarding its subject.
It may be enough to update the css because the functionality is good enough.
You can experiment with that with your browser's developer tools.

[440bx]

Disagree. Shouty websites are not really my thing. Much better is quite and calm and as much as possible also static.
To me a website that uses too much interactivity is a website that misses its purpose regarding its subject.
It may be enough to update the css because the functionality is good enough.
You can experiment with that with your browser's developer tools.

I don't think I implied something "shouty".

Again, while the Python website may not be perfect, it's got a reasonably good balance of features, information and visual appeal.  Not to mention that the language hasn't gone 4 years without an update.

If anything one of the things that should be added to the current FPC website is that an update is soon to be released.  At least that would mitigate the impression that the language is "not vigorous".  THAT should probably be the first item in the "latest news".

[PascalDragon]

If anything one of the things that should be added to the current FPC website is that an update is soon to be released.  At least that would mitigate the impression that the language is "not vigorous".  THAT should probably be the first item in the "latest news".

Well, we could ask users to test the RC1 there... 🤔

[marcov]

Well, we could ask users to test the RC1 there... 🤔

Since the lapsed time, maybe a RC2 

[Thaddy]

Just rename it RC2 and then declare it final. I'd rather see focus on the newer features, the stable features, that are mostly stable in trunk.
I know trunk is a head-ache, but then you can filter again. Bread and games. Things will calm down.
Happens all the time...Play the psychological game...
RC1 is good enough for a point release.

The point is, by doing no point releases at all and so many really new features in trunk there is a discrepancy between the two and that needs a resolve. They are growing apart too fast, which is not usually a good management decision, although it can be from a technical point of view.

I also appreciate point releases are boring. Just bite the bullit.

Few people understand release management anyway and the ones that do, do not mind because they are on trunk.
Give the children a cookie to celebrate.
The adagium "when it's ready" is not always an option, although I agree with it.

Suggest to name it "Pag Pots" 

(A gardening pot containing seeds that want to flower at some point)

[dbannon]

Well, we could ask users to test the RC1 there... 🤔

Test it ?  I have been using it routinely for a year. For my use (and my platforms) it works fine. Trouble is, my app is also distributed via Debian and they require building with only 'released' toolchain. But packages direct from my github site are all built with RC1, including all the Windows ones, all the MacOS ones.

Davo

[Thaddy]

Hear, hear, you can't keep asking us for years to test RC1. There may be very few issues but describe them and release 3.2.4.
Even as a stop gap.
Unless everything goes out of sync, that is...Then I agree with "it's ready when it's ready".
The remarks about Debian are correct. There's even a risk we won't get in again.

[PascalDragon]

Well, we could ask users to test the RC1 there... 🤔

Test it ?  I have been using it routinely for a year.

The RC1 exists since June of this year, so I doubt that you're using it for a year.

[dbannon]

Well, we could ask users to test the RC1 there... 🤔

Test it ?  I have been using it routinely for a year.

The RC1 exists since June of this year, so I doubt that you're using it for a year.

I am talking about the 3.2.4-branch, it has had one commit (relating to clang) in the last 366 days.

Davo

[paweld]

@PascalDragon - The files at https://downloads.freepascal.org/fpc/beta/3.2.4-rc1/ are from 8-12 months ago.

[Thaddy]

The RC1 exists since June of this year, so I doubt that you're using it for a year.

So there are multiple RC1's? 
https://forum.lazarus.freepascal.org/index.php/topic,56864.0.html thread.