Personally, a seperate web site or just a different section on the RAA site,
at this point, might not make a difference. It might help to simply do, for
example: RubyApps.domain.com and Ruby.domain.com. These are the same
server, perhaps just with a different homepages, and different default
search options (ie: which results show up first in a search, where to search
by default, etc.)
I vote for keeping it as simple as possible right now, but making sure we
are addressing the two identified audiences: developers and those looking
for apps developed in Ruby.
And yes, user comments a la freshmeat and other sites is a /great/ idea.
Someone should develop the module that creates a user environment like this,
and then we can implement it for our own site.
I agree with “newgie developers”. But how can a computer
language be used
by non developers? As for “marketing”, how would you use RAA for
That’d be the ‘Application’ part of RAA. A supplementary website
focusing on finished applications might not be a bad idea,
actually. It
could also allow for user comments a la freshmeat.
So we have a sub-domain for each of the different audiences.
The domain ‘rubyarchive.org’ becomes very fitting, because this because an
archive of much more than just apps (which is what RAA seems to imply).
Also, each subdomain tells you exactly what it is an archive of.
What do you think?
···
On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 06:22:38AM +0900, Dwayne Smurdon @ DNA Media Pro wrote:
It might help to simply do, for example: RubyApps.domain.com and Ruby.domain.com. These are the same server, perhaps just with a
different homepages, and different default search options (ie: which
results show up first in a search, where to search by default, etc.)
–
Daniel Carrera
Graduate Teaching Assistant. Math Dept.
University of Maryland. (301) 405-5137
