• ?WebsiteContentIdeas
  • ?WebsiteProposedSurveyQuestions
  • ?WebsiteProposedSurveyMethods
  • ?WebsiteProposedSiteMap

The new website should be geared towards the user and the users needs, whereas the current website tends to be more directed at the needs of the developers. Developers have entirely different needs than users, and should therefore have a specific, separate site dedicated towards them. However, this does not mean that the current site is all the developers need, just that the development site has a different set of needs, outside of the scope of a site targeted at users.

The new website should be an integrated experience for the users. Some sites to look at for design include:

The general consensus is that the FreeBSD website provides a good model to provide information to a large number of different types of users, while providing a clean interface, and without being distracting.

Some effective parts of the FreeBSD site include:

  • the "Get FreeBSD"
    • this should however be more similar to the Mozilla button, that guesses at the users' platform, and suggests the recommended version of ?OpenAFS for this platform.
  • the box at the bottom will allow for easy access to three types of information:
    • current information
    • important information that is no longer current, but still relevant
    • upcoming events or information that will be relevant
  • the content in the box is also provided in RSS which allows users to follow the feeds, and access information easily
  • The "New to ?FreeBSD" section provides information to prospective users of ?FreeBSD, something similar is warranted
  • Color scheme matching logo
    • "Power to Serve" catchy, something to remember ?FreeBSD by, sort of superfluous?

-- Jacob Thebault Spieker - 12 Nov 2008

If you want to contribute a new website for OpenAFS

Note: Ken Dreyer is working on a new openafs.org website.

Several people have volunteered to re-do the website for OpenAFS. There is a lot of history on the mailing lists, and this is an attempt to explain the issues.

The best single summary comes from this 2006 post. The entire thread is informative, but Russ says it best there.

Why there is no CMS

At present, the OpenAFS developers and gatekeepers are the ones who manage the website. They are busy improving OpenAFS and don't have time to learn, support, or deal with a CMS right now. If you want to be the CMS support person, please volunteer... for the long term (multiple years).

Nov 2010 post : "One challenge is that we don't have a site manager. Volunteers for site manager are welcome."

Aug 2006 post : "Setting up a CMS can be a pain and it is really difficult to recover when the maintainer leaves."

Nov 2010 post :"... we're all worried about having to maintain them going forward. The biggest problem is lack of resources and skills in deploying something fancier. One advantage to having everything in something simplistic (like the current static pages) is that at least you know you'll always have people around with the knowledge of how to do something with it."

Google Summer of Code 2008

In 2008 OpenAFS put forward a GSoC proposal for redesigning the website. See Jaltman's project document

Jacob Thebault-Spieker did a lot of groundwork planning (Nov 2008 post) for the website redesign, and the results are on the wiki, which is what you're reading now. (Unfortunately for us he was pulled on to other things (Nov 2008 post).)