Some of those look very nice indeed. How were they created? It sounds like people have been toying with this for a long time.
Perhaps it never happened because we wanted to go from the current site to mega awesome in one single step - which was always too much effort. I think a multi phase approach might have more chance of success - as I said in my immediate previous post if we could live with jekyll source for phase one (even though it may not be ideal) then we can keep most of the current content source 'as is' and simply choose a decent modern Bootstrap CSS template to re-render it in to deliver the best 'bang for buck' possible at this early stage. Or does Jekyll have a fairly fixed translator that provides little customizability? -----Original Message----- From: Martijn Dashorst [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, 12 November 2014 8:58 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Wicke website makeover time? Several attempts at a refresh have been done but they all strand in two things: - time to actually do something with a design that is received enthusiastically - copywriting the website, especially the front page For example I tend to doodle in keynote for ideas of a new web site look and my latest thing is actually going back to our roots (at http://wicket.sourceforge.net/1.2): http://imgur.com/D74s1dj http://imgur.com/UFxgSRI,jHawnst#0 http://imgur.com/UFxgSRI,jHawnst#1 I think it looks awesome but lack currently the time to actually do something more with it other than have it in keynote. There are some hurdles to consider: - website technology (currently jekyll, but asciidoctor might be a better future candidate, especially for the reference guide) - svn pub sub, I guess there's git pub sub but am not sure if/how that works - how to publish the site (currently generate, svn commit, but if guide is part of our build (to enable live, compiling examples) how does that integrate in the site workflow... Martijn On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 9:21 AM, Martin Grigorov <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > > On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 9:45 AM, Chris Colman <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Hi fellow wicketeers! >> >> We all know that Wicket has to be the most awesome and productive Java >> UI framework around but I am worried when I point new clients to the >> Wicket website because it's look and feel is possibly a little dated or >> '2007ish style'. >> >> I feel like the look and feel of the Wicket website doesn't do justice >> to the full awesomeness that we all know wicket has. >> >> We all know that, using the wicket Java UI framework it's possible to >> create websites with *any* look and feel but unfortunately many clients >> don't have this same technical awareness and see the website for Wicket, >> a framework for building web applications in Java, and assume that the >> Wicket website itself is an example of the type of webapp/website you'll >> end up with if you build it with Wicket - which we all know is not the >> case: we're building awesome AJAX enabled, modern, sexy Bootstrap >> templated webapps in Wicket. >> >> A few years ago someone had produced a prototype of a refurbished Wicket >> website that looked really quite nice but it never was deployed to the >> live server for some reason. > > > I guess you mean https://github.com/dashorst/wicket-site. > > >> >> These days I think most developers know that it's fairly easy to make a >> great, modern looking website using one of the many Bootstrap >> customizations (eg., Bootswatch). >> >> First question: >> >> Does anyone else think a wicket website makeover is overdue (or are most >> people happy with the current look and feel)? >> > > I do! > But I am not capable of doing it myself because I am not an artist. > I don't have this kind of imagination to create something pretty. > Functional - yes, but not pretty :( > > Recently I've had a conversation with a client about this topic. (They use > Wicket Bootstrap) > > Me (explaining why Wicket Bootstrap is not a module of Apache Wicket > distro): > <quote> > Today Bootstrap is the hype. Tomorrow something else will be > This is the main reason why WB hasn't been merged as a sub project of > Apache Wicket itself. > </quote> > > The client: > <quote> > Agreed, and I think the strategy of Wicket is fine for experienced web > developers. > > However, for every experienced developer, I assume there are 10 novices > trying out Wicket and if you don't steer novice users towards a HTML/CSS > framework to use with Wicket to create great looking apps, most of them > will be disappointed and wander off elsewhere. > </quote> > > More or less he said the same as you ! But I think he meant Wicket Examples > instead of http://wicket.apache.org/ > > >> If the answer is yes then please continue reading: >> >> Any chance some people are interested in offering time to perform a >> Wicket website makeover? >> > > I'll be glad to help with infrastructure, testing, fixing issues, etc. ! > > >> >> Some questions for the site maintainers - >> >> >> Are the current web pages: >> 1. Generated from any tool via XLST or anything? >> > > The code is hosted at > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/wicket/common/site/trunk. > We use http://jekyllrb.com/ to generate static HTML files. It is simple and > fast. > > >> 2. Served from a content management system? >> > > No. > > >> 3. Just static pages edited directly in HTML? >> > > Yes. > > 4. Served as a Wicket app? (would be awesome!) >> > > No. Apache Infrastructure team doesn't allow usage of dynamically generated > stuff because this leads of the higher maintenance cost. > > >> >> I guess the answer to these determines the quickest way possible to a >> refurbished website if Wicketeers agree that is appropriate. >> >> Could we hook together a simple system that actually uses a very simple >> Wicket app itself to host the pages? Eg., provide page content in some >> wiki style text format and have a simple Wicket page class that >> interprets this and outputs formatted content? >> > > No. See above. > > >> >> Aside: We have actually built a content management system for >> editing/hosting websites using Wicket but it's proprietary and I don't >> think Apache would approve of an Apache site being served by a >> proprietary content management system so that's probably not an option. >> We don't mind hosting it if they didn't mind but I'm thinking that's not >> going to be approved. >> >> >> Regards, >> Chris >> -- Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
