On Wednesday, May 6, 2015 at 11:34:15 AM UTC-5, Sean Corfield wrote: > > On May 5, 2015, at 11:48 PM, Kristo Koert <kristo...@gmail.com > <javascript:>> wrote: > > My argument was that a more visually appealing homepage would leave a > better first impression and attract more new beginner developers to check > out clojure. (Ex. comparing haskell.org or scala-lang.org vs clojure.org). > An opinion was expressed that "we don't need these low quality people in > the community". > > This is not the opinion of Cognitect or anyone supporting Clojure. We will update the clojure.org site at some point. I do not control the prioritization for when that will happen, but it's absolutely on the list. Ditto for ClojureScript (and props to the http://cljs.info folks for building some momentum).
I expect the existing "documentation" style pages to continue to exist on clojure.org - they are heavily linked to and cross-linked and are as close as we have to reference documentation for the language. I regularly update it based on feedback for things that are wrong, missing, or unclear. If you have feedback, send it to me - google group, email, twitter, jira, whatever. I expect a newer site to also have other things as well, such as official or community sourced tutorial-style information. I have done some work on what this should/could look like information-wise (thankfully no one will let me near design :). > This excludes quite a lot of complete newcomers, because ofcourse they > cannot tell the merits or demerits of a languages from a wall of text in > unfamiliar syntax from a page that seems to be without much love. They will > see a seemingly unappealing language. They will not have the opportunity to > learn to not judge a programming language based on the homepage until far > later in their careers maybe. > > > This is particularly frustrating from the point of view of someone > involved in ClojureBridge, where the whole point is to reach out to tech > minorities and encourage complete beginners to try Clojure. The issue has > been raised several times and is pretty much always shut down by "those in > charge". > I do not know of anyone "in charge" ever "shutting down" anything. Certainly, people have made prioritization decisions, but that's a far cry from what you are suggesting. > It was a huge struggle just to have the Getting Started page updated to > remove complexity and point at the wiki instead (although the wiki is also > _horrible_ from the point of view of new users). > I am happy to work with anyone to improve the Getting Started page. I have repeatedly made this offer and no one has ever followed up on it. If you're referring to changing that page to point to the wiki, that happened like 5 years ago, so does not seem relevant to today. I do not recall it being a struggle even when it happened. Seriously, if someone wants to work on this, make a page on the design wiki, flesh out some text and I'll work with you to publish it. Alex -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
