Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Python.org Redesign Request for Proposals

pythonorg-redesign.readthedocs.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 66 posts

Re: Python.org Redesign Request for Proposals

#41

Post by its_so_on »

lukeschlather wrote: post #38
its_so_on wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think 'hosting providers' are a throwback to the late 90's and the last decade. These days anyone who needs more than a service like wordpress (and there are many, many people who are happy to use hosted blogging etc servies) is likely to have their own server instance. Are there really that many people who have access to 'only' PHP, but not whatever framework they would like? (from django to rails).

I think you underestimate the usefulness of a hosted environment. I need a really good reason to set up a full stack myself and incur the maintenance problems of system upgrades and hardening an entire OS. That said, you are right that there are plenty of hosting providers with ruby/python available in some capacity.

In the comment that you're replying to, my exact words were "are there really that many people who have access to 'only' PHP, but not whatever framework they would like? (from django to rails)". After I said that loads of people are happy with Wordpress, and other similar services, including with plugins, and just use that instead of php and html.

So, whereas previously (in the 90s) you would have a big jump from HTML only with maybe PHP or you jump up to paying for a server every month and having to lock it down and administer it yourself, now, the former category has access to loads more 'hosted' service possibilities so that what you can do with "wordpress only" has substantially increased; meanwhile, the latter category has come down substantially, due to instances on the cloud being so much cheaper and the amount of uptake making it much more worth it for a company to put out a standardized image with a few frameworks, etc.

So my point was twofold. Firstly, the old 'hosted content' users have access (and use) substantially fuller services, and the old 'full stack' users AND some of the old 'php is all I can use' users now have EASY access to a full instance or whatever framework you want.

Between the two, I think your comment doesn't have much currency.

Re: Python.org Redesign Request for Proposals

#42

Post by hising »

irahul wrote: post #39
hising wrote: post #14

One thing that would really make the website work better is to make pages like http://docs.python.org/library/stdtypes.html hierarchical with an overview and one or two sub levels so each function gets its own page, making it easier to find via search (The Google) and do dynamic linking from IDE:s or whatever if the url routing were set up smart. Today when you search for 'random.choice python' you get to the random…

> Today when you search for 'random.choice python' you get to the random front page with 20+ random I prefer a single page for random than having 20 something pages for random.x. Here is the doc for random.choice: random.choice(seq) Return a random element from the non-empty sequence seq. If seq is empty, raises IndexError. A separate page for this will be textbook definition of overkill. If you already know what you…

As you see in my comment, I do not agree with you, but realize that "some people like to have the full spec for all random functions in one page...".

It is not overkill as I see it, a page for random.choice with official documentation and annotations and comments would be good in my book.

Re: Python.org Redesign Request for Proposals

#43

Post by obtu »

Looking at the requirements, particularly l10n and the REST API for editing (which rules out compilers, unless the API server operates at a different privilege level), this will have to be solved by something like a CMS. Except for the offline editing requirement, which makes something DVCS-backed necessary. Anyway, it will be a good showcase for whichever stack is chosen.

Re: Python.org Redesign Request for Proposals

#44

Post by its_so_on »

brown9-2 wrote: post #36
its_so_on wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Edit: now I'm at -3. Still, I'm going to let this ride (not delete it), as even though it is not about the web site, I think my suggestion is serious and would benefit Python - i.e. get to the right audience here. I will also add that Python is my favorite language, and I hold it in a completely separate league from every other language I'm familiar with. Nothing else comes close. That said. "Python.org Redesign Requ…

"that lives on the web" What does that even mean?

This is a good question. I don't know what the answer is, but there's a good chance http response objects aren't it.

Re: Python.org Redesign Request for Proposals

#45

Post by its_so_on »

jnoller wrote: post #29
its_so_on wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm saying that you need to broaden your input so that the people who would look at the devguide aren't the only people you're hearing from. Python can approach a local maximum that way, but the things that would make it truly awesome and attractive to web developers would be too out of the box for someone to think of like that. I'm saying, ask everyone, the whole community.

This is why we had a Web Dev summit at PyCon US 2012: https://us.pycon.org/2012/community/WebDevSummit/ - to discuss what we can do as a language and community to make it more "attractive" and ease the on-ramp for the web community as a whole. So, other efforts are under way for this, and orthogonal to the current RFP

I agree with you on the orthogonality, and wish you luck in getting a very wide base of feedback.

I think Python could be the best language for the web and for any programming anywhere: in the future, if it lives up to its potential, there will be a time when no one should even consider learning anything else as a first or only language. But, for a web developer, I don't think that time is now.

I hope you take fundamental redesigns very seriously moving forward. Good luck.

Re: Python.org Redesign Request for Proposals

#46

Post by akie »

I'm wondering if it's really a good idea to have such wildly differing requirements be fulfilled with one just proposal.

Let me elaborate: you're asking a potential bidder to be fluent in information architecture, and back-end development, and systems architecture, and design. Those four disciplines are so far apart that I would be very curious to see if you can select one company that does all of them equally well. And if you do happen to find one, it would be interesting to see if they really can deliver top-notch quality in all of them.

If you ask me, you'd be better of recruiting a separate design, possibly accompanied with an appropriate information architecture, and then start to think about how to do the back-end development and systems architecture.

Not only is this a separation of concerns (hooray!), I also think it will get you a bigger pool of applicants, they will also be more likely to be world class in their field. No-one is world class in all those fields at the same time, and trying to find one company that is will most likely get you an 'average' result in at least one area.

Re: Python.org Redesign Request for Proposals

#48

Post by SkyMarshal »

its_so_on wrote: post #44
brown9-2 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"that lives on the web" What does that even mean?

This is a good question. I don't know what the answer is, but there's a good chance http response objects aren't it.

Protip - complaining about your karma just makes people want to downvote you even more.

Resist complaining about being downmodded. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading. [1]

1. http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Python.org Redesign Request for Proposals

#49

Post by Eventh »

gosub wrote: post #32

One other thing they should improve is the search function in the documentation: http://docs.python.org/ The first relevant result for searching "string concatenation" is around the 20th place. http://docs.python.org/search.html?q=string+concatenation

Part of the problem is the use of Sphinx and its search engine (at least this was the case a year ago), where searching happens client-side in JavaScript. This limits how complex the search engine can be, before it is to slow or require to much data to download. Last time I looked it had a simple inverse index with a Porter stemmer and limited ranking of results.

This is great for documentation of most projects as it can be supported with only html+css+js, without a need for a web framework and hosting. But for the documentation of a major programming language I think something more advanced is expected.

Re: Python.org Redesign Request for Proposals

#50

Post by its_so_on »

SkyMarshal wrote: post #48
its_so_on wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a good question. I don't know what the answer is, but there's a good chance http response objects aren't it.

Protip - complaining about your karma just makes people want to downvote you even more. Resist complaining about being downmodded. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading. [1] 1. http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

duly noted, and I've edited and removed where I still could. Thanks.
Post reply on HN