Обсуждение: PostgreSQL website redesign
Hi all, As you will no doubt be aware, the PostgreSQL website is overdue for a fresh lick of paint, so we are planning to give it a new look in the near future. The plan is to use some existing community funds to employ the services of a professional designer who will be able to produce the new design. Some of the community already have experience working with the designer in question as they designed the Postgres Open website (http://postgresopen.org/), and I think you will agree, they did an excellent job. With that in mind, we want to establish some design goals. These will include : - what is the website's target audience? - how do we wish to be perceived? (e.g. traditional, modern, friendly, professional etc.) - what do we hope to achieve with the website design? - what new opportunities does this present us with? - what usability problems do we currently have that the redesign could address? You may have heard it said "there is no spoon". Similarly, there is no bike shed, so there's no colour to paint it. In other words, the gritty details (such as layout, colour, font-size, borders etc.) aren't up for discussion at this stage. Instead, a design committee (which has already been selected) shall agree on the final design goals, liaise with the designer to discuss the finer details, and to ensure our goals are met. The final design will be licenced under our very own PostgreSQL Licence. So with that, I'd like to open this topic for discussion. Thanks Thom
On 17 November 2011 00:10, Thom Brown <thom@linux.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > As you will no doubt be aware, the PostgreSQL website is overdue for a > fresh lick of paint, so we are planning to give it a new look in the > near future. The plan is to use some existing community funds to > employ the services of a professional designer who will be able to > produce the new design. Some of the community already have experience > working with the designer in question as they designed the Postgres > Open website (http://postgresopen.org/), and I think you will agree, > they did an excellent job. > > With that in mind, we want to establish some design goals. These will include : > - what is the website's target audience? > - how do we wish to be perceived? (e.g. traditional, modern, friendly, > professional etc.) > - what do we hope to achieve with the website design? > - what new opportunities does this present us with? > - what usability problems do we currently have that the redesign could address? > > You may have heard it said "there is no spoon". Similarly, there is > no bike shed, so there's no colour to paint it. In other words, the > gritty details (such as layout, colour, font-size, borders etc.) > aren't up for discussion at this stage. Instead, a design committee > (which has already been selected) shall agree on the final design > goals, liaise with the designer to discuss the finer details, and to > ensure our goals are met. > > The final design will be licenced under our very own PostgreSQL Licence. > > So with that, I'd like to open this topic for discussion. Okay, to get the ball rolling here's my initial input: What I'd like to see is something which suggests "open", "modern" and "clear", nothing elaborate or fancy. The design must aid people finding what they want rather than getting in the way of it. There's no point in people thinking "Wow, what a great looking site! Now where the hell is the documentation?" A website I believe follows this general direction is Drupal (http://drupal.org/). I'd want to avoid anything too cutesy or too corporate as neither of those really represents our users, and the user base diversity is quite broad. It would be interesting to see where visitors go upon visiting the site. One thing I tend not to notice on the main page is the "Shortcuts" section. This is one of the few places the wiki is referred to, and it's a shame it's not more clearly sign-posted since it contains plenty of helpful info. One page which I find fairly inaccessible is the "About" page: http://www.postgresql.org/about/ It just doesn't scan well as it's too dense, and not very attractive for a page for potential users who wish to be introduced to PostgreSQL itself. One thing to bear in mind is people using lower screen resolutions. A typical screen resolution on a netbook is 1024×600 (according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_netbooks), so it's probably safe to set that as our base. We won't want the first thing for people to see on every page to be a big banner with no actual visible content. So, does anyone know if we have analytics for visitors hitting the home page? It would be nice to be able to distinguish those who habitually click on the link they always click on immediately upon the page loading, and those contemplating where they want to go, who spend time looking at the whole page before clicking through to whatever they were looking for. Thom
Le 17/11/2011 01:10, Thom Brown a écrit : > Hi all, > > As you will no doubt be aware, the PostgreSQL website is overdue for a > fresh lick of paint, First of all, thanks to the people who handle this. This website needs love that's for sure :) Here's a few ideas : * I think target audience is new users. The website should focus on providing simple answers to basic questions : - What is PostgreSQL ? - Where can I get help ? - Where's the download link ? - Who uses PostgreSQL ? - How can I contribute? * Regular and advanced users don't need to go on the pg.org website everyday. For them the website should only be a gateway to the various community websites : the wiki, the planet, the pugs, pgxn, the mailing lists, etc. * Be more international, connect with local communities. If the main website is not translated, at least it should make it clear **on every page** that there are local websites in other languages (pg.fr, pg.jp, etc. ). New users that are not comfortable with English should have a chance to read content in their own language (when possible of course). * If think the message should be that PostgreSQL is free, innovative and used by very big companies. A slideshow on the front page could illustrate these 3 points : talk about a new feature in 9.1 , display a use case, advertize an event such as pgcon, etc. * I don't think the website should be optimized for tablets and mobile phones... * There's way too much information on the front page. People don't want to spend 3 minutes reading everything. Instead the front should drive users based on the 3 major needs : download / help / contribute For instance the Google Think website has very effective design for that: http://www.thinkwithgoogle.com/ That being said i have a few questions : a/ In 2009, a web design contest was launched... what happened to this initiative ? b/ Who's in the design committee ? and who choosed them ? c/ Sorry but I'm not a huge fan of the Postgres Open website :-/ It's full of HTML and CSS errors everywhere. The meta tags are pretty poor. Basic files like sitemap.xml or robots.txt are missing. There's no favicon either.... On what basis is this an "excellent job" ? d/ Seems you have already choosed the web designer, right ? Can somebody else propose his services or is this too late ? -- damien clochard dalibo.com | dalibo.org
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 12:10 AM, Thom Brown <thom@linux.com> wrote: > As you will no doubt be aware, the PostgreSQL website is overdue for a > fresh lick of paint, so we are planning to give it a new look in the > near future. It's not clear to me that redesigning the website will give us anything at all, but it will definitely drain time and focus away from things like writing patches or working out clear and workable designs for new features. The existing design works just fine in every way, so "we" are not unhappy. In fact the existing site is fairly well tuned with many people's feedback and pixel level arguments now done and dusted. We do need some marketing, but redesigning websites without purpose is not marketing. Please state the reasons you think a redesign is worth the effort. And how that is a priority over spending the same time and money on actual marketing, i.e. external contacts, whitepapers, press and such like. I grant that is likely more fun to redesign a website but that doesn't make it worthwhile. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 7:10 PM, Thom Brown <thom@linux.com> wrote: > So with that, I'd like to open this topic for discussion. First, thanks for taking an interest in this. Here's my $0.02. The website is in sore need of attention, but a large-scale redesign of the look-and-feel (which is what your description sounds like you're angling for -- correct me if I'm mistaken) isn't what's most needed. IMHO, basic maintenance issues are more pressing. For example, why do we keep out-of-date information about defunct alpha/beta releases http://www.postgresql.org/developer/alpha hanging around? Or much worse, the recently-discussed problem with subscribing to the mailing lists, which from a post a few days ago on -hackers sounds like it's still broken. That's got to be a *huge* turnoff to a potential new member of the community, when just signing up for the list hangs and appears broken. A few adjustments to the docs pages could go a long way. (I read the Postgres docs online extensively, so I have admittedly strong feelings about this area). The layout (i.e. CSS) of the pages themselves is decent enough. I'd like to see cross-links between the /static/ and /interactive/ pages. I'd also like to see cross-links between the docs pages to the other versions (e.g. the 9.0 version of the UPDATE page should also link to 9.1 and perhaps 8.4, 8.3, and 9.2). The Django docs handle this nicely. This would likely also help the Google-ability of doc pages for newly-released versions. And comments posted to the doc pages from version X.Y should be visible on the corresponding doc page for version A.B. I like the PHP docs in this regard, though they don't break out their docs by version. (Assuming posting comments on the web docs still works at all.. I have a dim memory of posted comments disappearing). Josh
On 11/19/2011 09:12 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: > On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 12:10 AM, Thom Brown<thom@linux.com> wrote: > >> As you will no doubt be aware, the PostgreSQL website is overdue for a >> fresh lick of paint, so we are planning to give it a new look in the >> near future. > It's not clear to me that redesigning the website will give us > anything at all, but it will definitely drain time and focus away from > things like writing patches or working out clear and workable designs > for new features. It will drain time only from those who chose to contribute in a manner they feel useful. > > The existing design works just fine in every way, so "we" are not > unhappy. In fact the existing site is fairly well tuned with many > people's feedback and pixel level arguments now done and dusted. Well actually the existing design does not work just fine in every way. It is not user friendly, nor is it simple, nor is it a comprehensive resource for information (the wiki having become that destination). > > We do need some marketing, but redesigning websites without purpose is > not marketing. No, that is the job of 2ndQuadrant, CMD, PgExperts, EnterpriseDB, VMware etc... Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake
On 19 November 2011 14:29, damien clochard <damien@dalibo.info> wrote: > Le 17/11/2011 01:10, Thom Brown a écrit : >> Hi all, >> >> As you will no doubt be aware, the PostgreSQL website is overdue for a >> fresh lick of paint, > > First of all, thanks to the people who handle this. This website needs > love that's for sure :) > > Here's a few ideas : > > * I think target audience is new users. The website should focus on > providing simple answers to basic questions : > > - What is PostgreSQL ? > - Where can I get help ? > - Where's the download link ? > - Who uses PostgreSQL ? > - How can I contribute ? > > * Regular and advanced users don't need to go on the pg.org website > everyday. For them the website should only be a gateway to the various > community websites : the wiki, the planet, the pugs, pgxn, the mailing > lists, etc. > > * Be more international, connect with local communities. If the main > website is not translated, at least it should make it clear **on every > page** that there are local websites in other languages (pg.fr, pg.jp, > etc. ). New users that are not comfortable with English should have a > chance to read content in their own language (when possible of course). We can certainly bear that in mind. However, that's more of a website content issue rather than design. This is an issue that needs addressing though. While the project's default language is English, we have large German, French, Japanese and Portugese-speaking communities, so sign-posting users to sources of information in their own language would be useful. But the designer won't want to hit a moving target, so we will be freezing structural changes to the main website at least until the design has been implemented. They can, however, provide their idea of how that would be presented though. > * If think the message should be that PostgreSQL is free, innovative > and used by very big companies. A slideshow on the front page could > illustrate these 3 points : talk about a new feature in 9.1 , display a > use case, advertize an event such as pgcon, etc. I like that idea. > * I don't think the website should be optimized for tablets and mobile > phones... Agreed. The site isn't for casual browsing, so no extra effort should go into catering for touch-friendly interfaces. > * There's way too much information on the front page. People don't want > to spend 3 minutes reading everything. Instead the front should drive > users based on the 3 major needs : download / help / contribute > For instance the Google Think website has very effective design for that > : http://www.thinkwithgoogle.com/ > > > That being said i have a few questions : > > a/ In 2009, a web design contest was launched... what happened to this > initiative ? It failed to produce any useable candidate unfortunately. > b/ Who's in the design committee ? and who choosed them ? The design committee was selected and approved by the core steering team and consists of Gavin M Roy (being the CTO of a very successful website company), Josh Berkus (advocacy guy and -core), Dave Page (web guy and -core), Magnus Hagander (another web guy), and Selena Deckelmann (very user focussed). > c/ Sorry but I'm not a huge fan of the Postgres Open website :-/ It's > full of HTML and CSS errors everywhere. The meta tags are pretty poor. > Basic files like sitemap.xml or robots.txt are missing. There's no > favicon either.... On what basis is this an "excellent job" ? Problematic meta tags, dodgy HTML and CSS and sitemap.xml and robots.txt aren't a designer's job. Here we're talking about visual design, although I expect some structural changes may potentially happen, but nothing major. In my opinion Postgres Open's site is entirely appropriate for a conference site, giving bold, simple and direct information, and "branding" the conference with a certain look.The designer will, however, be producing the necessaryCSS amendments. The site is already XHTML-compliant, the CSS is generally fine, and we'll make sure it stays that way. > d/ Seems you have already choosed the web designer, right ? Can somebody > else propose his services or is this too late ? Well, I haven't selected anything myself. A professional designer was selected and approved by the core steering committee. Thom
On 19 November 2011 17:12, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 12:10 AM, Thom Brown <thom@linux.com> wrote: > >> As you will no doubt be aware, the PostgreSQL website is overdue for a >> fresh lick of paint, so we are planning to give it a new look in the >> near future. > > It's not clear to me that redesigning the website will give us > anything at all, but it will definitely drain time and focus away from > things like writing patches or working out clear and workable designs > for new features. Well we can't abandon one area of the project just because there's another area that's considered more important than everything else. The community is constantly involved in arranging conferences and PUG meetups, infrastructure changes and assisting others with general PostgreSQL problems. And likewise, this is another are of the project that not everyone will necessarily be interested in. > The existing design works just fine in every way, so "we" are not > unhappy. In fact the existing site is fairly well tuned with many > people's feedback and pixel level arguments now done and dusted. Well it's 7 years old now. It could be argued that people will see the same PostgreSQL that they saw 7 years ago. As such, we haven't progressed, innovated or become modern in any way. The current design could be seen as PostgreSQL stagnating and been neglected. Design communicates as well as words. Ours may be saying "nothing new to see here". Of course, changing too often would have an equally negative effect, suggesting that we're inconsistent, unstable and can't make up our minds. > We do need some marketing, but redesigning websites without purpose is > not marketing. > > Please state the reasons you think a redesign is worth the effort. And > how that is a priority over spending the same time and money on actual > marketing, i.e. external contacts, whitepapers, press and such like. I > grant that is likely more fun to redesign a website but that doesn't > make it worthwhile. This is probably something -core would like to give a more complete answer on since it was their decision. But my views are as above. Regards Thom
On 19 November 2011 23:47, Josh Kupershmidt <schmiddy@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 7:10 PM, Thom Brown <thom@linux.com> wrote: >> So with that, I'd like to open this topic for discussion. > > First, thanks for taking an interest in this. Here's my $0.02. > > The website is in sore need of attention, but a large-scale redesign > of the look-and-feel (which is what your description sounds like > you're angling for -- correct me if I'm mistaken) isn't what's most > needed. Large-scale redesign is probably overstating the changes. Our site isn't huge, and there's probably only a handful of types of page. > IMHO, basic maintenance issues are more pressing. For example, why do > we keep out-of-date information about defunct alpha/beta releases > http://www.postgresql.org/developer/alpha Already addressed. The new code for the site just hasn't been launched yet. > hanging around? Or much worse, the recently-discussed problem with > subscribing to the mailing lists, which from a post a few days ago on > -hackers sounds like it's still broken. That's got to be a *huge* > turnoff to a potential new member of the community, when just signing > up for the list hangs and appears broken. Never heard of that problem, but that's a matter for the web team. > A few adjustments to the docs pages could go a long way. (I read the > Postgres docs online extensively, so I have admittedly strong feelings > about this area). The layout (i.e. CSS) of the pages themselves is > decent enough. I'd like to see cross-links between the /static/ and > /interactive/ pages. I'd also like to see cross-links between the docs > pages to the other versions (e.g. the 9.0 version of the UPDATE page > should also link to 9.1 and perhaps 8.4, 8.3, and 9.2). The Django > docs handle this nicely. This would likely also help the > Google-ability of doc pages for newly-released versions. Like I've said previously, this is more a content issue. The design can be made with such functionality in mind, but the designer wouldn't implement such changes. > And comments posted to the doc pages from version X.Y should be > visible on the corresponding doc page for version A.B. I like the PHP > docs in this regard, though they don't break out their docs by > version. (Assuming posting comments on the web docs still works at > all.. I have a dim memory of posted comments disappearing). Again, another issue/feature request for the web team. Thom
Le 20/11/2011 12:05, Thom Brown a écrit : > On 19 November 2011 14:29, damien clochard <damien@dalibo.info> wrote: >> Le 17/11/2011 01:10, Thom Brown a écrit : >>> Hi all, >>> >>> As you will no doubt be aware, the PostgreSQL website is overdue for a >>> fresh lick of paint, >> >> First of all, thanks to the people who handle this. This website needs >> love that's for sure :) >> >> Here's a few ideas : >> >> * I think target audience is new users. The website should focus on >> providing simple answers to basic questions : >> >> - What is PostgreSQL ? >> - Where can I get help ? >> - Where's the download link ? >> - Who uses PostgreSQL ? >> - How can I contribute ? >> >> * Regular and advanced users don't need to go on the pg.org website >> everyday. For them the website should only be a gateway to the various >> community websites : the wiki, the planet, the pugs, pgxn, the mailing >> lists, etc. >> >> * Be more international, connect with local communities. If the main >> website is not translated, at least it should make it clear **on every >> page** that there are local websites in other languages (pg.fr, pg.jp, >> etc. ). New users that are not comfortable with English should have a >> chance to read content in their own language (when possible of course). > > We can certainly bear that in mind. However, that's more of a website > content issue rather than design. This is an issue that needs > addressing though. While the project's default language is English, > we have large German, French, Japanese and Portugese-speaking > communities, so sign-posting users to sources of information in their > own language would be useful. But the designer won't want to hit a > moving target, so we will be freezing structural changes to the main > website at least until the design has been implemented. They can, > however, provide their idea of how that would be presented though. > Pointing to non-english communities on every pages is not a big structural changes :) It just requires some links in header or footer. Any international corporate website has either langage-switching buttons or links to the local offices. However i understand the fact that the structure should be freeze before the designer starts. It's common sense. But in the same time, if we don't change the content itself, the new design will have a limited effect. This was the biggest problem with the 2009 webdesign contest : people were not allowed to modify the existing structure and content (except for the front page). This was a mistake. It made the work very hard for contestants and eventually the contest failed. I really think that the website needs much more than just CSS magic. I mean you can change the paint and add shiny stuff, the website will still look archaic if the content remains untouched. The goods news is that the structure and content just need some simplification. It's not a lot of work. There's no content to add... We just no removed and transfer pages elsewhere because the website is too deep. There's way to much information. Like Joshua said many pages should be transfered to the wiki : The "proganda" page, the history, almost all the developer section, etc. All of this belongs in the wiki. Reduce the complexity of the website will have many advantages : that's less work the webmaster team, the designer will have more possibilities and less content means there's lower risk of outdated content, etc. So don't make the same mistake again. This is not just a CSS problem. In fact, i'd rather keep the current CSS than leaving the structure unchanged... >> * If think the message should be that PostgreSQL is free, innovative >> and used by very big companies. A slideshow on the front page could >> illustrate these 3 points : talk about a new feature in 9.1 , display a >> use case, advertize an event such as pgcon, etc. > > I like that idea. > Yep at the same time : almost everyone does that kind of slideshow right now, it's almost a web design standard... which means it may seems "old-fashioned" in a few years ;-) But a front page slideshow has lots of advantages... It keeps the visitors a little longer on the front page and gives the feeling that the website is dynamic (provided the information in the slideshow are not out-dated of course... ) >> * I don't think the website should be optimized for tablets and mobile >> phones... > > Agreed. The site isn't for casual browsing, so no extra effort should > go into catering for touch-friendly interfaces. > I also suggest we stop supporting IE6 and it'll save the designer a lot of time... >> c/ Sorry but I'm not a huge fan of the Postgres Open website :-/ It's >> full of HTML and CSS errors everywhere. The meta tags are pretty poor. >> Basic files like sitemap.xml or robots.txt are missing. There's no >> favicon either.... On what basis is this an "excellent job" ? > > Problematic meta tags, dodgy HTML and CSS and sitemap.xml and > robots.txt aren't a designer's job. Seriously ? Are you saying that the web designer will not deliver HTML/CSS code ? that he won't be responsible for the new website SEO ? -- damien clochard dalibo.com | dalibo.org
Going to try answering the proposed questions: > - what is the website's target audience? I think this is broken down into groups: 1. Potentials Users - people evaluating using Postgres for professional / academic / personal purposes. They need to feelthere is a concise way to understand what Postgres is used for and why to use it, and be able to easily find all thedetails to answer their questions 2. Ongoing Users - people who are already using Postgres and need to find resources to solve their problems (i.e. docs),but also can find a reason to be more active in the community 3. Community - those active in the project, making sure they have easy access to all community resources available > - how do we wish to be perceived? (e.g. traditional, modern, friendly, > professional etc.) Clean, professional, resourceful. More professional adoption of Postgres => more support for the community => more contributionsto the project > - what do we hope to achieve with the website design? > - what new opportunities does this present us with? Even though I agree that the PG website layout is good and really it just needs "some paint," with a redesign there willmost likely be layout changes because of minor tweaks. Hopefully they can be limited, but if there would be any layoutchange I would suggest it would be the homepage, specifically with readability. The easiest part to address is the font size, but that would push a lot of what we have already out on it of the viewingpane. But this presents us with an opportunity: the first paragraph should be a brief description about what Postgresis and why you should use it. If you go to any of the NoSQL database sites, the first thing you read on them iswhat their database is, what it's features / differentiators are, and where to download it. To find that info on the Postgressite, you have to go one-click in, and even then, the most concise description is on the "About" page, which in alot of sites today, is used more for a historical perspective. A clear message on the homepage on why Postgres is and why you should use it, coupled with the download links, info on news/ events / blogs, would be good, and perhaps have a link to testimonials on a different page. This also assumes we makethe page a bit more readable, i.e. with a larger font all-around. > - what usability problems do we currently have that the redesign could address? I actually think the site is usable as is :-) But perhaps someone who is a UX expert with less familiarity with the projectcould give a better opinion on that. Best, Jonathan
On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 11:08 AM, Thom Brown <thom@linux.com> wrote: > On 19 November 2011 17:12, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 12:10 AM, Thom Brown <thom@linux.com> wrote: >> >>> As you will no doubt be aware, the PostgreSQL website is overdue for a >>> fresh lick of paint, so we are planning to give it a new look in the >>> near future. >> >> It's not clear to me that redesigning the website will give us >> anything at all, but it will definitely drain time and focus away from >> things like writing patches or working out clear and workable designs >> for new features. > > Well we can't abandon one area of the project just because there's > another area that's considered more important than everything else. > The community is constantly involved in arranging conferences and PUG > meetups, infrastructure changes and assisting others with general > PostgreSQL problems. And likewise, this is another are of the project > that not everyone will necessarily be interested in. > >> The existing design works just fine in every way, so "we" are not >> unhappy. In fact the existing site is fairly well tuned with many >> people's feedback and pixel level arguments now done and dusted. > > Well it's 7 years old now. It could be argued that people will see > the same PostgreSQL that they saw 7 years ago. As such, we haven't > progressed, innovated or become modern in any way. The current design > could be seen as PostgreSQL stagnating and been neglected. Design > communicates as well as words. Ours may be saying "nothing new to see > here". Of course, changing too often would have an equally negative > effect, suggesting that we're inconsistent, unstable and can't make up > our minds. > >> We do need some marketing, but redesigning websites without purpose is >> not marketing. >> >> Please state the reasons you think a redesign is worth the effort. And >> how that is a priority over spending the same time and money on actual >> marketing, i.e. external contacts, whitepapers, press and such like. I >> grant that is likely more fun to redesign a website but that doesn't >> make it worthwhile. > > This is probably something -core would like to give a more complete > answer on since it was their decision. But my views are as above. I think your answers above do pretty well hit the nail on the head. We want to ensure that the all areas of the project visibly progress and don't stagnate, and updating our web presence is a part of that. We are also aware that the current website does not meet the needs of everyone by any stretch of the imagination. In particular, it's quite unfriendly to new visitors, and gives them little in the way of guidance to find the information they're likely to need. -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 1:50 PM, damien clochard <damien@dalibo.info> wrote: > > This was the biggest problem with the 2009 webdesign contest : people > were not allowed to modify the existing structure and content (except > for the front page). This was a mistake. It made the work very hard for > contestants and eventually the contest failed. The contest was done in a way that was intended to avoid exactly that problem - and in fact, not one of the entrants cited that limitation as a factor affecting their ability to design. The reason the contest eventually failed was actually because none of the designs were actually liked by those judging them. -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 2:24 PM, Thom Brown <thom@linux.com> wrote: > > So, does anyone know if we have analytics for visitors hitting the > home page? It would be nice to be able to distinguish those who > habitually click on the link they always click on immediately upon the > page loading, and those contemplating where they want to go, who spend > time looking at the whole page before clicking through to whatever > they were looking for. We do - you should now have access: www.google.com/analytics -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
On 11/19/2011 09:29 AM, damien clochard wrote: > c/ Sorry but I'm not a huge fan of the Postgres Open website :-/ It's > full of HTML and CSS errors everywhere. The meta tags are pretty poor. > Basic files like sitemap.xml or robots.txt are missing. There's no > favicon either.... On what basis is this an "excellent job" ? > The Postgres Open site is built on top of some Django code from another conference, and it turned out to be a nightmare to work with. The primary basis you should judge the designer of that site on is whether the visual look is nice. As far as I know every error you mentioned resulted from a framework issue that they had no control over. All time that had been intended for fixing those sort of things (and far more) was gobbled up just getting the schedule to display, which had nothing to do with the job they were working on. -- Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant US greg@2ndQuadrant.com Baltimore, MD PostgreSQL Training, Services, and 24x7 Support www.2ndQuadrant.us
Excerpts from Greg Smith's message of mié nov 23 12:28:31 -0300 2011: > On 11/19/2011 09:29 AM, damien clochard wrote: > > c/ Sorry but I'm not a huge fan of the Postgres Open website :-/ It's > > full of HTML and CSS errors everywhere. The meta tags are pretty poor. > > Basic files like sitemap.xml or robots.txt are missing. There's no > > favicon either.... On what basis is this an "excellent job" ? > > > > The Postgres Open site is built on top of some Django code from another > conference, and it turned out to be a nightmare to work with. Uh, the new Postgres site is also Django ... is this a bad sign? -- Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 16:37, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote: > > Excerpts from Greg Smith's message of mié nov 23 12:28:31 -0300 2011: >> On 11/19/2011 09:29 AM, damien clochard wrote: >> > c/ Sorry but I'm not a huge fan of the Postgres Open website :-/ It's >> > full of HTML and CSS errors everywhere. The meta tags are pretty poor. >> > Basic files like sitemap.xml or robots.txt are missing. There's no >> > favicon either.... On what basis is this an "excellent job" ? >> > >> >> The Postgres Open site is built on top of some Django code from another >> conference, and it turned out to be a nightmare to work with. > > Uh, the new Postgres site is also Django ... is this a bad sign? No, it has nothing to do with django, and everything to do with how the templates are set up. -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 3:28 PM, Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 11/19/2011 09:29 AM, damien clochard wrote: >> >> c/ Sorry but I'm not a huge fan of the Postgres Open website :-/ It's >> full of HTML and CSS errors everywhere. The meta tags are pretty poor. >> Basic files like sitemap.xml or robots.txt are missing. There's no >> favicon either.... On what basis is this an "excellent job" ? >> > > The Postgres Open site is built on top of some Django code from another > conference, and it turned out to be a nightmare to work with. The primary > basis you should judge the designer of that site on is whether the visual > look is nice. As far as I know every error you mentioned resulted from a > framework issue that they had no control over. All time that had been > intended for fixing those sort of things (and far more) was gobbled up just > getting the schedule to display, which had nothing to do with the job they > were working on. We have our own new framework, which should be going live in the next 2 or 3 weeks. Any new design will be based on that. -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 16:38, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:> On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 16:37, Alvaro Herrera > <alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote: >> >> Excerpts from Greg Smith's message of mié nov 23 12:28:31 -0300 2011: >>> On 11/19/2011 09:29 AM, damien clochard wrote: >>> > c/ Sorry but I'm not a huge fan of the Postgres Open website :-/ It's >>> > full of HTML and CSS errors everywhere. The meta tags are pretty poor. >>> > Basic files like sitemap.xml or robots.txt are missing. There's no >>> > favicon either.... On what basis is this an "excellent job" ? >>> > >>> >>> The Postgres Open site is built on top of some Django code from another >>> conference, and it turned out to be a nightmare to work with. >> >> Uh, the new Postgres site is also Django ... is this a bad sign? > > No, it has nothing to do with django, and everything to do with how > the templates are set up. Pressed send to early. FWIW,the django based version of the postgres site is *more* standards compliant and cleaner than the old one. At least according to Thom, and he tends to notice such things. -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
Greg Smith wrote: > The primary basis you should judge the designer of that site on is > whether the visual look is nice. For me, the answer is that it is hard to look at, and makes me inclined to get my business there done and get the heck out. I think it is primarily the color choices, and primarily the fact that it is bright letters shining out from a darker background. Now, I realize how easy that is to change, and that we're not supposed to be bike-shedding colors or fonts right now, but it's hard to know whether I might think it is "nice" if it weren't for that. For me, the big advance in UI wasn't moving from green letters blazing out of the dark background to amber letters blazing out of a dark background, but the change to dark letters on a light background -- preferably black and white except for things you want to attract special attention. -Kevin
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 4:32 PM, Kevin Grittner <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov> wrote: > Greg Smith wrote: > >> The primary basis you should judge the designer of that site on is >> whether the visual look is nice. > > For me, the answer is that it is hard to look at, and makes me > inclined to get my business there done and get the heck out. I think > it is primarily the color choices, and primarily the fact that it is > bright letters shining out from a darker background. Now, I realize > how easy that is to change, and that we're not supposed to be > bike-shedding colors or fonts right now, but it's hard to know > whether I might think it is "nice" if it weren't for that. > > For me, the big advance in UI wasn't moving from green letters > blazing out of the dark background to amber letters blazing out of a > dark background, but the change to dark letters on a light background > -- preferably black and white except for things you want to attract > special attention. It should be noted that we're not looking at getting anything like the Postgres Open site - it just happens to be the same guy who we know is capable of doing good work to the customers requirements. -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
Kevin Grittner wrote: > Greg Smith wrote: > > > The primary basis you should judge the designer of that site on is > > whether the visual look is nice. > > For me, the answer is that it is hard to look at, and makes me > inclined to get my business there done and get the heck out. I think > it is primarily the color choices, and primarily the fact that it is > bright letters shining out from a darker background. Now, I realize > how easy that is to change, and that we're not supposed to be > bike-shedding colors or fonts right now, but it's hard to know > whether I might think it is "nice" if it weren't for that. > > For me, the big advance in UI wasn't moving from green letters > blazing out of the dark background to amber letters blazing out of a > dark background, but the change to dark letters on a light background > -- preferably black and white except for things you want to attract > special attention. I had the same reaction about the Postgres Open web site, but couldn't express it was well as Kevin has above. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. +
On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 5:32 AM, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote: > On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 1:50 PM, damien clochard <damien@dalibo.info> wrote: > The reason the contest eventually failed was actually because none of > the designs were actually liked by those judging them. > You know, one might argue that this is not proof that you need a different designer, so much as different judges ;-) Robert Treat play: xzilla.net work: omniti.com
On 11/23/2011 10:37 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Uh, the new Postgres site is also Django ... is this a bad sign? Django is a pretty low-level framework, and the Postgres Open issues were around the application looking more suitable for the conference than it really was. There won't be any overlap between those issues and whatever problems might pop up in the new PostgreSQL site. I've only been tinkering with Django stuff for about four months now. So far it sure seems the case that there are typically an order of magnitude more bugs in a typical Django plug-in or application than in the core code. -- Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant US greg@2ndQuadrant.com Baltimore, MD PostgreSQL Training, Services, and 24x7 Support www.2ndQuadrant.us
On 17 November 2011 00:10, Thom Brown <thom@linux.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > As you will no doubt be aware, the PostgreSQL website is overdue for a > fresh lick of paint, so we are planning to give it a new look in the > near future. The plan is to use some existing community funds to > employ the services of a professional designer who will be able to > produce the new design. Some of the community already have experience > working with the designer in question as they designed the Postgres > Open website (http://postgresopen.org/), and I think you will agree, > they did an excellent job. > > With that in mind, we want to establish some design goals. These will include : > - what is the website's target audience? > - how do we wish to be perceived? (e.g. traditional, modern, friendly, > professional etc.) > - what do we hope to achieve with the website design? > - what new opportunities does this present us with? > - what usability problems do we currently have that the redesign could address? > > You may have heard it said "there is no spoon". Similarly, there is > no bike shed, so there's no colour to paint it. In other words, the > gritty details (such as layout, colour, font-size, borders etc.) > aren't up for discussion at this stage. Instead, a design committee > (which has already been selected) shall agree on the final design > goals, liaise with the designer to discuss the finer details, and to > ensure our goals are met. > > The final design will be licenced under our very own PostgreSQL Licence. > > So with that, I'd like to open this topic for discussion. I had intended to resurrect this topic towards the end of January (so the majority of people would have returned from any seasonal holidays), but February it is. I'll start collating the feedback in the near future, so one last call for feedback, and an opportunity for those who didn't catch the topic the first time around. -- Thom
As there clearly appears to be no further input, I am now closing this thread. Thanks to everyone for your feedback, which I've now collated and it shall be used to influence the design. -- Thom