On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 10:01 AM, Hannes Magnusson
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 12:12 AM, Levi Morrison
> wrote:
> >> If we probide beta=0 option I think we will wind up in the same
> >> situation, stalled effort as people just set their preferences to
> >> beta=0 "until the new look is finis
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 12:12 AM, Levi Morrison wrote:
>> If we probide beta=0 option I think we will wind up in the same
>> situation, stalled effort as people just set their preferences to
>> beta=0 "until the new look is finished".
>
> This is just one more reason to not launch it until it is be
> If we probide beta=0 option I think we will wind up in the same
> situation, stalled effort as people just set their preferences to
> beta=0 "until the new look is finished".
This is just one more reason to not launch it until it is better. I
think that there has been a reasonable amount of codi
I really hate this new gmail composing interface that makes it really
difficult not to top-post.
On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 9:29 PM, Paul Dragoonis wrote:
> I like your optimistic ideas Hannes.
>
> I honestly think the new one is almost ready if we decide on the most
> mission critical bugs to be res
I like your optimistic ideas Hannes.
I honestly think the new one is almost ready if we decide on the most
mission critical bugs to be resolved, and we resolve them, we should be
able to just switch.
NB: We can add a suttle bar at the top saying to people, "view this page in
the old style", so th
On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 1:51 PM, Stewart Lord wrote:
> On Dec 27, 2012, at 7:13 AM, Adam Harvey wrote:
>> 3. When should we launch the site?
>>
>> As far as I'm aware, there aren't any functionality gaps relative to
>> the stable site now. The design seems locked down, and this has been
>> draggin
On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 2:12 PM, Stewart Lord wrote:
> I have been thinking about the styling problems and I think we need some
> help. I am going to reach out to a couple of visual designers I know to see
> if one of them is willing to donate some time. Anyone else have contacts?
I sent an ema
I have been thinking about the styling problems and I think we need some help.
I am going to reach out to a couple of visual designers I know to see if one of
them is willing to donate some time. Anyone else have contacts?
Stew
On Dec 31, 2012, at 1:03 PM, Levi Morrison wrote:
> Also, can we
On Dec 31, 2012, at 1:03 PM, Levi Morrison wrote:
> Also, can we put in writing somewhere our targeted browser support? Or
> at least temporarily what will our IE target support be?
>
> As of PHP 5.5 we'll drop Windows XP support. Theoretically that means
> we can target IE 9+ because the last ve
Also, can we put in writing somewhere our targeted browser support? Or
at least temporarily what will our IE target support be?
As of PHP 5.5 we'll drop Windows XP support. Theoretically that means
we can target IE 9+ because the last version of IE that runs on XP is
version 8.
Even if we don't d
On 2012-12-31, at 10:41 AM, Sherif Ramadan wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 1:25 PM, Stewart Lord wrote:
>
>
> On 2012-12-30, at 10:07 PM, Sherif Ramadan wrote:
>
> > Sorry, that was poorly worded. I didn't mean to suggest that the each data
> > URI generates a transfer over TCP.
On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 1:25 PM, Stewart Lord wrote:
>
>
> On 2012-12-30, at 10:07 PM, Sherif Ramadan
> wrote:
>
> > Sorry, that was poorly worded. I didn't mean to suggest that the each
> data
> > URI generates a transfer over TCP. What I'm saying is that there is a
> > caching disadvantage her
On 2012-12-30, at 10:07 PM, Sherif Ramadan wrote:
> Sorry, that was poorly worded. I didn't mean to suggest that the each data
> URI generates a transfer over TCP. What I'm saying is that there is a
> caching disadvantage here since the initial JSON request itself can't be
> cached (the one com
On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 6:44 PM, Paul Dragoonis wrote:
> I also agree that the site is not production ready, we still have to fix a
> bunch of outstanding issues. Is there a reference list of outstanding
> todo's or issues?
>
> Do we have our own bugs.php.net category? if not we should add one.
>
On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 11:30 PM, Stewart Lord wrote:
>
> On Dec 30, 2012, at 7:17 PM, Sherif Ramadan wrote:
>
> > Now for the bad news:
> >
> > 1) Prototype actually requires a lot more requests per page view than
> the existing site. (Upon preliminary testing this about double the number
> of r
On Dec 30, 2012, at 7:17 PM, Sherif Ramadan wrote:
> Now for the bad news:
>
> 1) Prototype actually requires a lot more requests per page view than the
> existing site. (Upon preliminary testing this about double the number of
> requests on average). The main reason for this seems to be that
Since we're deciding on whether or not the site is production ready we
should take into consideration function over form. I think I'd like to
point out a few objective points here.
1) The site functions as intended. There are no major functionality issues
that I've found so far. Things like stylin
Hi Guys,
I also agree that the site is not production ready, we still have to fix a
bunch of outstanding issues. Is there a reference list of outstanding
todo's or issues?
Do we have our own bugs.php.net category? if not we should add one.
I'd like to get more momentum on this (from peeps like u
On Dec 27, 2012, at 7:13 AM, Adam Harvey wrote:
> 3. When should we launch the site?
>
> As far as I'm aware, there aren't any functionality gaps relative to
> the stable site now. The design seems locked down, and this has been
> dragging on for way too long. I'd like to suggest an aggressive
> t
On 28 December 2012 11:29, Levi Morrison wrote:
> The trimmed down version is less mega than it used to be, but it's
> still bad. I vote we kill it in favor of landing pages plus good
> second-level navigation (like what exists in the documentation pages
> on the left-hand side).
I'm against this
On 29 December 2012 04:30, Philip Olson wrote:
> On Dec 27, 2012, at 7:13 AM, Adam Harvey wrote:
>> I've spent part of my afternoon working through the beta site and
>> trying to deal with the last few issues that we have left before we
>> can make a decision on when to make it live. There are und
On Dec 27, 2012, at 7:13 AM, Adam Harvey wrote:
Ooooh nice, most PHP tasks require someone to really make them happen. :)
> Ladies, gentlemen, droids,
>
> I've spent part of my afternoon working through the beta site and
> trying to deal with the last few issues that we have left before we
> c
On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 10:13 AM, Adam Harvey wrote:
> Ladies, gentlemen, droids,
>
> I've spent part of my afternoon working through the beta site and
> trying to deal with the last few issues that we have left before we
> can make a decision on when to make it live. There are undoubtedly
> stil
>> 1. Should we keep the mega dropdown?
>>
>> I know there are some varying opinions on this — I personally like it,
>> but it definitely needs to be constrained to be relatively short for
>> each of the categories. I've had a stab at (significantly) reducing
>> the size of the documentation menu b
Ladies, gentlemen, droids,
I've spent part of my afternoon working through the beta site and
trying to deal with the last few issues that we have left before we
can make a decision on when to make it live. There are undoubtedly
still styling issues that should be dealt with, but at this point, I
f
25 matches
Mail list logo
