add ppc binaries to download-matrix

[MylesBorins]

Both LTS and Stable now have PPC 64le versions. Let's publish that on
the downloads page of nodejs.org

edit: simplified this pr

/cc @mhdawson @jasnell

[MylesBorins]

would this be the way you would like it displayed @mhdawson? 64le

[ghost]

Travis build passed 👍

[rvagg]

pls don't merge this yet, discussion going on here needs to come to a conclusion: nodejs/build#205 (comment)

[MylesBorins]

thanks for the context @rvagg

Just noticed it was missing after being added and didn't connect the dots

How it looks now for example

I don't think it looks terribly cluttered, but I have no problem closing this in lieu of a better fix

[rvagg]

My concerns are both about clutter and usability, which are obviously connected concepts. I believe it's becoming increasingly difficult for users to select the downloads that they need and the expanding list is adding to the confusion.

We have targets on this list that have very low usage, PPC is clearly going to be one of those as it's not a mass-market platform, it also carries the confusing history of being an Apple architecture up until the switch to Intel. "SunOS" is problematic because it's really just SmartOS (these binaries won't work on Solaris) and its download numbers are tiny (SmartOS users are pkgin to get their Node most of the time I think). The "Docker Image" isn't a download link per se and arguably doesn't belong on this particular list. ARM Binaries don't come near the Intel-based platforms in terms of download numbers and users appear to have problems self-selecting which one they need—based on issue regularly filed against nodejs/node, so we could probably move it and improve how we present them.

And to blunt, inclusion of SmartOS and PPC binaries on this page are more about marketing for their respective platform owners than about giving actual users a place to download binaries. It's much more likely that both of these platforms will have more convenient ways of consuming binaries than downloading from here. I have no problem with flag waving here, we all benefit from being able to show the diversity of support Node has, I'd just rather it be done in a way that increases difficulty for the vast bulk of visitors to this page who have no interest in uncommon platforms.

/cc @nodejs/build

[mhdawson]

Based on earlier discussion I think we'd discussed 2 sections. One with the downloads for Linux, Windows and Mac and then a second section with the rest. I was going to try to look at that today.

[mhdawson]

This is a first cut at what I had in mind:

[mhdawson]

@rvagg is what I have any better in respect to your concerns ?

[rvagg]

Yeah, although I think we could do some better wording.

Some suggestions, mainly for someone implementing this on @nodejs/website:

• Remove "Primary Downloads", it doesn't really add much
• Change heading of second section to "Advanced download options" (can't think of anything better atm)
• Move the Python note far down to the bottom (using a footnote symbol?), or even remove it, it's a distraction
• The "Current version" bit could be improved, maybe at the top somewhere.

[fhemberger]

Why not use the term "Additional Platforms" for ARM, SunOS, PPC, Docker and the downloads provided by IBM?

[rvagg]

I could live with that

[silverwind]

Maybe replace that Python notice with a "See below for additional platforms."?

[fhemberger]

We could also put the unordered list below the "additional platforms" section. I think it even makes more sense that way.

How about this for the "Current version" issue?

We could get rid of the "download-header" class as well, it's no longer used.

[silverwind]

@fhemberger +1 to that.

[silverwind]

On a unrelated note, could someone update @nodejs-github-bot's avatar to use the same one as the org? The current one doesn't work too well on dark backgrounds:

[fhemberger]

Quick mockup of combined changes

[silverwind]

1. Get rid of the Python notice, build requirements are mentioned better in the README.md contained in the source package.
2. These are ranked by popularity, right? Doesn't ARM get more downloads than SunOS nowadays which could justify moving it above SunOS.

[fhemberger]

@silverwind 👍

[silverwind]

Oh, and "Install Node.js via package manager" could be shortened to "Install via package manager".

[mhdawson]

The point of the original change is that the ppc le binaries are now official and provided on the community download site. So I'd want something like:

[phillipj]

On a unrelated note, could someone update @nodejs-github-bot's avatar to use the same one as the org?

@silverwind it's updated now

[stevemao]

Why do we need to list 3 IBM links that all link to the same page?

[silverwind]

@phillipj thanks, looking good now!

[silverwind]

@fhemberger any reason why you changed the LTS label in these screenshots? Imho, it's not ideal that the text now wraps to another line and the old text was fine imho.

[jbergstroem]

What differentiates the ppc builds from for instance stuff we build on joyent or arm? I mean, what does 'official' imply here? For instance, we already know that calling the joyent builds sunos is incorrect since it won't really run on sunos. What we need is a sunos host for that to actually start working properly again. Would that denote its 'offical' standing?

We're deploying the servers, setting up the ci and building it through our release with shasum's generated by us. Might make sense to clarify this.

[fhemberger]

@silverwind The screenshot was taken from the live website, text was changed in #570.

[silverwind]

Ah, right. Well then let's make the button slightly wider to stop the wrapping.

[mhdawson]

As I think @jbergstroem indicates, in my mind the "Unofficial provided by IBM" is for the cases were we don't have the builds in the community ci yet. The original purpose of this PR was to reflect that we now build PPC le binaries as part of the regular releases and to have the page provide links to the binaries which are already available in "All downloads" directory. For example: https://nodejs.org/dist/v4.4.0/

[rvagg]

Could we put ARM above SmartOS? It gets more downloads and this is a primary place for some of those folks to go, particularly ARMv6 which isn't served by any other source afaik. SmartOS have their pkg ecosystem as the primary place to get builds already.

[MylesBorins]

@rvagg not a problem updating . How would you feel about arm being included primary list?

[rvagg]

ARM just isn't in the same league as x (yet), we can reevaluate if that changes significantly

[fhemberger]

@thealphanerd There's still a wide margin between the "Downloads" headline and the version. Otherwise LGTM. Thank you for taking care of all those details … 👍

As soon as you push your changes, I think we're good to go.

[mhdawson]

lgtm from me

[MylesBorins]

@fhemberger What do you think of this?

[fhemberger]

@thealphanerd Perfect, go for it!