[Mono-list] Updating or Redoing go-mono.net

[Pavlica, Nick]

"Most ambitious would be to put the site entirely into ASP.NET, making
it a showcase for Mono software"

IMHO :)

This is absolutely critical, and has been a point of contention for some
time.  By not using your own product, you are telling everyone that even
the developers can't get it to work on there production site.  To start,
a basic port and a little cleanup shouldn't be an unrealistic project
for the talent that in floating around on this project.

"Please move the Mono site to Mono/ASP.NET!"  


On Fri, 2004-01-09 at 14:05, Aaron Weber wrote:
> Hello all,
> 
> Miguel mentioned to me that we ought to update go-mono.net at some
> point. While at first the major site audience was people who wanted to
> contribute to Mono as a platform, now we have more kinds of people
> that we need to pay attention to:
> 
> * People contributing to the Mono platform
> * C# developers who want to use Mono, ASP.NET, gtk#, and so forth, but
> don't want to contribute to the platform
> * Power-users who want to use things written in C#, but aren't
> developers.
> 
> I think two or three things we can do. 
> 
> The easiest is a simple content update, maybe with some
> re-organization. We'll make sure that info on use and installation is
> easy to find, clean up the directory structure into a few primary
> sections: news/about/general, platform development, programming with
> C#/Mono, and using Mono/C# software. This would be relatively simple
> but wouldn't solve any major structural issues with the site.
> 
> A more serious update would involve redoing the left-hand navigation
> and creating a real directory structure. Ideally, we should have a
> menu system that expands as you go down (see www.ximian.com), rather
> than a long list of items on the left side of the page. This would be
> great, but I probably don't have the autoconf/make/etc. skills to
> rewrite the site scripts.
> 
> Most ambitious would be to put the site entirely into ASP.NET, making
> it a showcase for Mono software. This would probably mean a ground-up
> redesign, and might as well include a new look to emphasize the
> difference. That would be really cool. I have no idea how advisable
> that is, though-- it could be a long project that would require
> resources better spent on developing mono and software for it.
> 
> a.
> 
> 
> 
>