Landing page (second review cycle) #425
Conversation
|
This pull request has been mentioned on NixOS Discourse. There might be relevant details there: https://discourse.nixos.org/t/marketing-team-meeting-minutes-5/7303/1 |
Co-authored-by: davidak <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: asymmetric <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: asymmetric <[email protected]>
|
Small typo in the video - $ # For last example let us build a minimal docker image with Nix
+ $ # For the last example let us build a minimal docker image with Nix However does not really matter. |
|
@Mic92 Thank you. I fixed the typo. |
In order to move this PR forward I won't add any examples. But please create a PR against Once this PR gets merged I was hoping to invite the community to brainstorm on examples. |
|
it's too fast!!! i can't read that fast. it's already gone when i have read half of the sentences. give people some time to read and understand |
| virtualHosts."example.com" = { | ||
| enableACME = true; | ||
| forceSSL = true; | ||
| locations."/".root = "/var/www"; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't have a clear idea how to make this have content while not complicating too much.
We can improve or replace this example in next PRs. I still think the example gets the message across even if nothing is being served from /var/www
There was a problem hiding this comment.
can nginx even start when it is missing?
you could serve the nginx default page like debian does after installing nginx package
|
It looks very bad on small screens (mobile)
|
Looks like mainly the video needs to be made responsive. The rest looks fine. |
)
)
)
yes. i commented on the that change by e-mail. got a little messed up. also search field and code |
I don't think video is going to fast. I asked few who told me that the video is having the right speed and if it would be going slower they would lose the interest. Also if they want it to go slower they can pause the video. But as I said I only asked handful of people. I think going out with the proposed speed is ok and we can listen for the feedback. In any case since the whole video is scripted we just need to increase the value. If you think this is a blocker, please test it and provide new "--step" value and upload the video to asciinema.org in order for use to compare the two.
|
yes, it's good for now :) |
| <div class="span6"> | ||
| <h2>Minimal docker image</h2> | ||
| <p> | ||
| Using <code>Dockefile</code> you are responsible to: |
| <li>decide how to split into layers for better caching</li> | ||
| </ul> | ||
| <p> | ||
| Writing <code>Dockefile</code> that would produce a minimal image is |
This is a continuation from #387, but I chose to close that PR since the discussion became too long. I hope this would make it easier to review.
I noticed we hit the wall with the discussion there. It is mostly my fault since I opened too many topics at once. I took a step back and simplify what I am trying to do here, while using what we already agree upon.
Here is what I understood we agree uppon:
Apart from what we agreed here is what I did:
One of the goals of this PR was to also flatten the navigation and get rid of "per project" navigation. We were already doing this with each page we refreshed, but this rounds up this effort.
Still to be done until we can merge this PR:
My main goal is now to merge this as soon as possible with the things that we already agreed upon and open subsequent pull requests to improve. It would be much simpler to have separate discussions on specific parts of the landing page.
Of-course if you think the this PR makes current landing page worse then please comment, I definitely don't want to make things worse.
cc-ing previous reviewers @edolstra @davidak