Author Topic: Engineering the GAE Website (Read 26142 times)

hailstone · « **Reply #50 on:** 3 February 2009, 11:33:19 »

I don't mind the existing design.

A few issues with the new one:

Can you explain the 3 boxes below the banner and the big space underneath the nav links?
The navigation area is a bit restricted. What if we want more links (although less is probably better)?
There's no footer

I can imagine a gameplay video/animation looping in the circle behind title text.

orion · « **Reply #51 on:** 4 February 2009, 00:55:07 »

Hailstone, this design is subject to any changes. I added the 3 boxes just as a little preview to what the webpage could look like. I will edit the image to fit the GAE after I finish typing this sentence.

ZaggyDad · « **Reply #52 on:** 16 March 2009, 19:40:27 »

It might be good to make the site address glestadv.codemonger.org, or something more related to what we're doing now.

hailstone · « **Reply #53 on:** 17 March 2009, 11:42:03 »

Possibly even a whole new domain name like www.glestadv.co.cc (is no cost) that points to codemonger.org.

I have added a 'Website' product to the bug tracker so these sort of feature requests can be added.

maxpower · « **Reply #54 on:** 19 March 2009, 18:35:45 »

When will the GAE site be done?

orion · « **Reply #55 on:** 5 May 2009, 23:36:16 »

Extreemely busy for last 4 months, but I haven't forgetten. Yesterday, 2 friends showed interest in making the website so I handed sine of the work to them. Unlike me, these people are 100% legit web designers (meaning that they don't have to worry about school and other things getting in the way). I'm so sorry about this.

hailstone · « **Reply #56 on:** 6 May 2009, 07:51:47 »

It's ok if you're busy, it happens to everyone, but it would be good if you let us know so we can arrange something else (sorry if you did let us know before now). Are your friends going to do a complete redesign or will they use you're existing work?

orion · « **Reply #57 on:** 6 May 2009, 22:12:58 »

Hailstone, I apologize once again. Actually, my friends are working on the core coding of the website. They're making it so that the website style and pictures can be changed easily.

orion · « **Reply #58 on:** 7 May 2009, 15:39:08 »

I'm starting to photoshop some of the units of Glest. I hope to make them look more...real.
Here's a picture of a sword I'm planning on using.

Omega · « **Reply #59 on:** 7 May 2009, 15:55:13 »

BTW, can you change the start screen so that it renders properly? For me, the text to enter the site is not in the button, and I have to scroll down to see it. Might I recommend you make the text part of the image and give it an image map???

* The sword looks cool, but rather odd...

PS: It's nice to see you back!

ZaggyDad · « **Reply #60 on:** 11 May 2009, 17:49:29 »

Quote from: omega on 7 May 2009, 15:55:13

BTW, can you change the start screen so that it renders properly? For me, the text to enter the site is not in the button, and I have to scroll down to see it. Might I recommend you make the text part of the image and give it an image map???

* The sword looks cool, but rather odd...

PS: It's nice to see you back!

Image map? Why?

...Oh. I see. That makes sense.

orion · « **Reply #61 on:** 15 May 2009, 11:30:28 »

Fixing it is not a problem. The front page is a result of bad web coding.

maxpower · « **Reply #62 on:** 17 June 2009, 07:02:13 »

Any news on the site development progress?

Omega · « **Reply #63 on:** 20 June 2009, 18:45:15 »

Bah, I could finish a site like this in less than 12 hours!

As far as I know, Orion has been away for a long bit... However, so has daniel... The most active people on the GAE team is hailstone, but he is working with the actual project, not the website. The people are kinda scattered. I say they need to open the GAE group up again and let new people like Silnarm in. Seriously, he has been a blessing for Glest in the past little while!

assassin · « **Reply #64 on:** 20 June 2009, 19:11:50 »

I agree, I think the approach the GLADE team took of making a team was good, maybe it could be tried with GAE.
(If it is, I volunteer for a testing position!)

But to take a wider perspective, Glest needs complete reorganisation. MartiÃ±o has moved on, and so basic glest is no longer getting improved. I think that it is time for GAE to become the official/main glest release.

hailstone · « **Reply #65 on:** 20 June 2009, 23:08:56 »

As far as I am concerned, Silnarm is already a part of the team and he's been contributing code to the repository. GAE was already announced as the main development version but the post has disappeared. I imagine as the project becomes more mature people will switch anyway. Testers are always needed and will be extremely important when we merge the latest Glest code (keep an eye out for the topic).

I'm not too concerned about the website at the moment since we don't have an "official" release yet.

silnarm · « **Reply #66 on:** 21 June 2009, 00:52:17 »

Quote from: hailstone on 20 June 2009, 23:08:56

Testers are always needed and will be extremely important when we merge the latest Glest code (keep an eye out for the topic).

Indeed, we will need a small army of testers... and getting some in before the merge with 3.2.2 would actually be good... more on that soon

Quote from: hailstone

I'm not too concerned about the website at the moment since we don't have an "official" release yet.

Too true, while the next 'release' will run much smoother than Vanilla Glest, it wont have stable multiplayer, so not to many people are likely to make the switch.

assassin · « **Reply #67 on:** 21 June 2009, 09:24:51 »

Quote from: hailstone on 20 June 2009, 23:08:56

GAE was already announced as the main development version but the post has disappeared. I imagine as the project becomes more mature people will switch anyway.

If this is the case, then maybe GAE should be vanilla-glest independent. (i.e. with it's own data packages, so that downloading the original glest is not compulsory.)

Quote from: silnarm on 21 June 2009, 00:52:17

Too true, while the next 'release' will run much smoother than Vanilla Glest, it wont have stable multiplayer, so not to many people are likely to make the switch.

Couldn't you have the GAE "unstable" multiplayer and the normal glest "stable" multiplayer both in GAE?

silnarm · « **Reply #68 on:** 21 June 2009, 12:30:09 »

Quote from: assassin on 21 June 2009, 09:24:51

If this is the case, then maybe GAE should be vanilla-glest independent. (i.e. with it's own data packages, so that downloading the original glest is not compulsory.)

Down the track perhaps, I can't see GAE being compatible with the current map file format in the future, and while we could change that without breaking XML compatibility, frankly the tileset format needs a reworking too.

Of course, we'll need to get FPM back on track if we plan to provide our own data

Quote from: assassin

Couldn't you have the GAE "unstable" multiplayer and the normal glest "stable" multiplayer both in GAE?

Could, yes... but I'm personally not willing to lift a finger re-integrating code that we're just going to throw away later in any case.

assassin · « **Reply #69 on:** 21 June 2009, 13:12:20 »

Quote from: silnarm on 21 June 2009, 12:30:09

Of course, we'll need to get FPM back on track if we plan to provide our own data

Maybe the GLADE team could do FPM... But that is down to John...

Quote from: silnarm on 21 June 2009, 12:30:09

Could, yes... but I'm personally not willing to lift a finger re-integrating code that we're just going to throw away later in any case.

Fair enough.

gameboy · « **Reply #70 on:** 21 June 2009, 17:03:39 »

I would love to do FPM.

assassin · « **Reply #71 on:** 21 June 2009, 17:46:49 »

Cool!
However, presumably you will need to finish dark magic first and then get John's approval...

Omega · « **Reply #72 on:** 22 June 2009, 18:55:48 »

I was planning on giving a hand to FPM later, after military, though GAE needs more features, and the wiki needs a better description. FPM can't be finished until there is a way to carry units!

ZaggyDad · « **Reply #73 on:** 17 November 2009, 21:40:52 »

Quote from: D.Loove on 14 November 2009, 05:02:01

Im looking for one or more good textbook definitions the word robust from the field of mechanical engineering. How do your textbooks define the term?

Please stay on topic. And I don't think many other people here would have a mechanical engineering textbook.

Omega · « **Reply #74 on:** 18 November 2009, 16:47:06 »

Isn't it obvious? It's spam!

BTW, Dan, how's it going at getting glest.codemonger.org back up?

News:

Author Topic: Engineering the GAE Website (Read 26142 times)

orion

ZaggyDad

maxpower

orion

orion

orion

ZaggyDad

orion

maxpower

assassin

assassin

assassin

gameboy

assassin

ZaggyDad