Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

The Way Ahead: Setting The Scope and Roadmap for This Project #10

Open
Mega-JC opened this issue Feb 17, 2023 · 1 comment
Open

The Way Ahead: Setting The Scope and Roadmap for This Project #10

Mega-JC opened this issue Feb 17, 2023 · 1 comment

Comments

@Mega-JC
Copy link
Member

Mega-JC commented Feb 17, 2023

This repository was created to quickly get a website up and running for the pygame-ce fork of the upstream pygame project and its documentation, both which can now be accessed at https://pyga.me and https://pyga.me/docs .

This effort is really appreciated, not just by me, but by probably all the other pygame-ce developers and users of the site.

However I later noticed that the scope of the website was left pretty open-ended, with the overall goal being the creation of a dynamic site for the entire pygame community, involving things like a system for user projects.

This sounds cool, but from my perspective, taking the website in that direction doesn't seem like a good idea. Despite the JS-only tech stack, there seems to be a lack of planning for how to reliably expand the site to fulfil those promises, as well as a lack of communication with the org maintainers on how to manage the project.

Instead of expanding the website this way, it would be better to keep it as a surface for showcasing pygame-ce as a library and host its documentation instead, much like it's currently doing, and move plans for dynamic community content (e.g user projects) to another project entirely.

This has multiple benefits:

  1. Simple, zero-cost static site hosting for pygame-ce related matters via GitHub Pages.
    This frees up developers from worrying too much about web development matters, as they can instead focus on putting up up-to-date information about pygame-ce online.

  2. Separation Of Concerns.
    Community endeavours are best managed separately from the development side of things, as they can be much larger in scope and more demanding. This also applies to websites. However, this doesn't mean that both must be completely isolated, as links can be used to seamlessly link them together.

By separating the larger aspects of a dynamic community website from the smaller aspects of a development/documentation website, we on the community management side can better define the goals of the site, the technology required, the way development should be managed, the external services required to run the site, the domain name to use, and how to fund the endeavour.

Before the forking of upstream pygame and pygame-ce, plans for a community website were raised multiple times in the Pygame Community Discord server from both server staff and public members, and ever since registration was disabled on https://www.pygame.org and the site maintainer started taking it down to virtue signal political matters, it's become pretty clear that a new website would benefit the pygame community at large. Let us give this endeavour the attention and organisation it needs to be successful for a long time.

@novialriptide
Copy link
Member

It sounds like you want to separate the pygame-ce showcase & documentation side and the dynamic community blog-like side into different repositories. I do not agree with this, what's the point? This will complicate things even further.
The main reason why I haven't started on the more backend-heavy aspects of the website is that I've been busy with my part-time job and working on university homework.

If you're concerned about the documentation-side of the project getting too complicated, we can do https://docs.pyga.me instead.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants