Overview
Examples
Screenshots
Comparisons
Applications
Download
Documentation
Tutorials
Bazaar
Status & Roadmap
FAQ
Authors & License
Forums
Funding Ultimate++
Search on this site
Search in forums












SourceForge.net Logo
Home » Community » Ultimate++ Webs: Functioning, Layout , Design, Features and Structure of these forums, homepage etc. » Ideas for design, and structure of the web site
icon14.gif  Ideas for design, and structure of the web site [message #17400] Wed, 13 August 2008 18:35 Go to next message
amrein is currently offline  amrein
Messages: 209
Registered: August 2008
Location: France
Experienced Member
Hi,

There are a few things wrong for me in the website design. I hope what I wrote will help you.

1. The main menu (left side) should be:

------- 8 < --------

About
Overview
Screenshots
Download
FAQ
------
Manual
Examples
Status & Roadmap
Comparisons
Forums
Wiki
-------
Funding Ultimate++
Authors & License

------- 8 < --------

- Why? Because here is how it goes in most newcomers:

What this? An overview? Can I see it in action? I didn't understood something or have an issue downloading...

- Then, after the first steps (installation, ...):

Want to learn deeply. Are there simple examples? Cool, where do the wall project go next, I want to be sure Utimate++ will still exist in a few years. Now, I want to see how to ask questions directly to the authors. Ok, let's put forum answers into the wiki F.A.Q.

- And finally:

Good software. I want to give money.

Note that "Authors & License" should be in the first list but everyone always search for it at the end of the menu list.


2. When clicking on the left menu, most right page don't have a title.

You could add it, and change the selected menu bar background. Add an arrow or change the menu like a left tab view.


3. When clicking on the left menu, most right page don't have any index.

The idea is to let people in one click to know where they are and the plan of the page they will read.


4. Now, one by one. "Examples" bar is not ordered.

It's a mess because there is no title, no subtitle, no plan. How to get to an example using the button class? Wink
There are two sections, but "application examples" should be the last one.


5. "Screenshots" bar is ordered but doesn't answer the user request.

TheIDE screenshots, Chameleon screenshots, U++ examples should have at least one screenshots on this page. The best ones. The reader must have an overview just there. If he wants, he will be able to click on "more..." to see more screenshots about TheIDE, Chameleon...
Other concern: TheIDE Ok. Chameleon, a newcomer doesn't know already that this is U++ theme engine.


6. Comparisons tab. Nothing to say.

7. Download tab, is not up-to-date?.

Well, I will be happy to help for the Linux port (rpm mainly). I will add a message to another topics about why I think Ultimate++ doesn't have a wild audience.


8. Documentation

Most Linux developers first search for the documentation before the reference. They use the documentation to lean. They use the reference to learn one class at a time or to find details.
This is why people like to have documentation for the wall library in one section than a 2nd section with all references.
FOSS developers are used to have reference with doxygen (www.doxygen.org). Try it, just install doxygen than run doxywizard to see the output (I know topic++ exist)


9. Roadmap

We see "Current release 2008.1" but no future road map. I read for example in the forum: Ultimate++ is stable, miss a better Linux and MacOS port, miss easy rpm compilation, miss better documentation, ...


10. Authors & License

Who has done this and what licence should I use for my application? In the case of Ultimate++, you also need to tell more about the Ultimate++ BSD licence and other BSD included libraries.
Even after reading a few pages, I was frightened with the LGPL/GPL licence because I didn't understand if Ultimate++ was linking with a LGPL/GPL library or not. If so, they would be a licence problem.

I like the way the licence appear on the website (black, white, yellow,...).

Regards
Re: Ideas for design, and structure of the web site [message #17402 is a reply to message #17400] Wed, 13 August 2008 20:09 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mirek is currently offline  mirek
Messages: 12122
Registered: November 2005
Ultimate Member
amrein wrote on Wed, 13 August 2008 12:35


Well, I will be happy to help for the Linux port (rpm mainly)



Hello, you are WELCOME! Smile

Right now we are setting new "infrastructure" server, basically ubuntu 8.04 / amd64. Do you think it will be possible to release .rpms on it (as e.g. nightly-builds)?

Mirek
Re: Ideas for design, and structure of the web site [message #17412 is a reply to message #17400] Thu, 14 August 2008 07:46 Go to previous messageGo to next message
amrein is currently offline  amrein
Messages: 209
Registered: August 2008
Location: France
Experienced Member
Yes.

As soon as the source code is good for easy build ("make" and "make install" with good parameters to be able to tell where to find headers and where to install), building a package is no more complicated then:

# rpmbuild -ta yourtarball.tar.gz

and you get an yourtarball-version.i586.rpm and yourtarball-version.src.rpm. On x86_64: yourtarball-version.x86_64.rpm

I will checkout svn tonight and tell you what to fix the 2 U++ Makefile (a few fix I wrote already but for the official released source).
Re: Ideas for design, and structure of the web site [message #17417 is a reply to message #17402] Thu, 14 August 2008 13:30 Go to previous messageGo to next message
amrein is currently offline  amrein
Messages: 209
Registered: August 2008
Location: France
Experienced Member
I'm back in business.

luzr wrote on Wed, 13 August 2008 20:09

amrein wrote on Wed, 13 August 2008 12:35


Well, I will be happy to help for the Linux port (rpm mainly)



Hello, you are WELCOME! Smile

Right now we are setting new "infrastructure" server, basically ubuntu 8.04 / amd64. Do you think it will be possible to release .rpms on it (as e.g. nightly-builds)?

Mirek



I will start another thread about rpm building. I don't want to flood this thread.

New Ubuntu servers? Cool. And what do you think about my ideas, I mean the web site design (not the rpm easy construction Wink?
Re: Ideas for design, and structure of the web site [message #17419 is a reply to message #17400] Thu, 14 August 2008 14:21 Go to previous messageGo to next message
amrein is currently offline  amrein
Messages: 209
Registered: August 2008
Location: France
Experienced Member
Another thing about the website, there's problem in the the current BSD licence content. It doesn't match yours. Here is the license template from http://www.opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php

-----8 < --------

Copyright (c) <YEAR>, <OWNER>
All rights reserved.

Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met:

* Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
* Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.
* Neither the name of the <ORGANIZATION> nor the names of its contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission.

THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS "AS IS" AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT OWNER OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

-----8 < --------


Re: Ideas for design, and structure of the web site [message #17421 is a reply to message #17412] Thu, 14 August 2008 16:39 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mirek is currently offline  mirek
Messages: 12122
Registered: November 2005
Ultimate Member
amrein wrote on Thu, 14 August 2008 01:46

Yes.

As soon as the source code is good for easy build ("make" and "make install" with good parameters to be able to tell where to find headers and where to install), building a package is no more complicated then:



We are almost there. However, an Project/Export is still required to get decent Makefile.

Even then, I think the most reasonable is two-level design - exported Makefile is not aware about "install", so maybe another top-level Makefile should provide it and call exported Makefile for "all".

Quote:


I will checkout svn tonight and tell you what to fix the 2 U++ Makefile (a few fix I wrote already but for the official released source).



Are you aware the Makefile is generated, correct? Smile

Mirek
Re: Ideas for design, and structure of the web site [message #17422 is a reply to message #17419] Thu, 14 August 2008 16:42 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mirek is currently offline  mirek
Messages: 12122
Registered: November 2005
Ultimate Member
amrein wrote on Thu, 14 August 2008 08:21

Another thing about the website, there's problem in the the current BSD licence content. It doesn't match yours. Here is the license template from http://www.opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php

-----8 < --------

Copyright (c) <YEAR>, <OWNER>
All rights reserved.

Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met:

* Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
* Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.
* Neither the name of the <ORGANIZATION> nor the names of its contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission.

THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS "AS IS" AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT OWNER OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

-----8 < --------





There is more BSD-type licenses floating around. So far we have not cared, I guess "COPYING-PLAIN" (adapted from Enlightmen) sums it up.

But I think we should be more serious about licensing stuff now.

Mirek
Re: Ideas for design, and structure of the web site [message #17424 is a reply to message #17400] Thu, 14 August 2008 16:49 Go to previous messageGo to next message
amrein is currently offline  amrein
Messages: 209
Registered: August 2008
Location: France
Experienced Member
There're only two BSD licence so far:

http://producingoss.com/en/license-choosing.html#license-bsd

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/bsd.html
Re: Ideas for design, and structure of the web site [message #17426 is a reply to message #17424] Thu, 14 August 2008 17:46 Go to previous message
mirek is currently offline  mirek
Messages: 12122
Registered: November 2005
Ultimate Member
amrein wrote on Thu, 14 August 2008 10:49

There're only two BSD licence so far:

http://producingoss.com/en/license-choosing.html#license-bsd

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/bsd.html



BSD-type license != BSD license.

Anyway, you are right that this is one more thing to fix.

Also, to make things worse, we have in fact a mix of licenses.

Mirek
Previous Topic: Typos on U++ web pages
Next Topic: Error in RSS Link !!!
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Tue Dec 10 15:05:23 CET 2019

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01122 seconds