(Closed) Change the website
Kris
Public
Seen by 44
# Proposer
## Proposer (name, handle, etc.):
@Kris
## Proposer’s role:
I do things. Lately I had to use the website to sell tickets.
# The advice process
## Information gathered before posting
I've bothered most people involved with this site about this now. I've also spent a lot of time making websites.
## People/roles most affected by this proposal
- People who aren't integrated that well into Kiez Burn
- People looking for directions to site
## People/roles with the most knowledge and experience relevant to this proposal:
@Erin @Veroca R. Sala
robots
# The proposal
## Background
The website was down for weeks. It's very slow.
The website is build on technology so old that it can vote. There are spiders everywhere.
It contains information that's not up to date, and that cannot be changed by stakeholders (e.g. list of kieze).
The design is not uniform (e.g. the space between paragraphs in the "2019 financial report" is so big it's unclear whether it's an image not loading or not - also there are no finances on that page)
It also fails to conform to a lot of web accessibility guidelines. It scores poorly on Google's mobile checking thing.
## The proposal
* Move the website from a "LAMP stack" to "JAM stack"
* Utilize modern tools like Hugo to make a performant site
* Move most of the information over to community platforms where more people can edit.
* Basically everything that changes from year to year would be good to move out so realizers don't have to grapple with access.
* Put the design and everything else in a public Git repository
* Preferably one with a nice web-based edit interface so non-technical people can easily change things
## How would the proposal be implemented
By copying the design and contents over to a new platform, and making adjustments.
## Who would implement this proposal
I can do it if nobody else want's to.
## When would this proposal be implemented
Next weekend?
## What would be the cost (time, money, effort, etc.) of this proposal
I have no idea what we pay for this, but I imagine there's some savings to be made.
## What are the advantages of this proposal (relative to the current situation and/or counter-proposals)
Make things more accessible.
## What are the disadvantages of this proposal (relative to the current situation and/or counter-proposals)
It's hard work.
# Decision
Doin' it! It's on the roadmap, probably for next cycle (post KB).
Kris · Thu 7 Apr 2022 6:19PM
I'm a bit sad at this comment because I doesn't seem that I've adequately communicated the problems I see, nor what the proposed solution is. There's a lot of worry here that feels unfounded, and I wish you'd come with it earlier so I could have addressed it.
I am however not going to lend much credence to sunk cost, we regularly set things on fire.
I do have a few issues with how information is organized which is mostly small things I don't think we'd have many differences on (way too deep nesting some places for instance). My main gripes are the atrocious load times (10 seconds to render complete on some pages), and maintainability. That's both in the content space with all the dead links, and on the backend where nobody bothers to update the certificates for months leaving the site unusable. Somebody could spend weeks fixing all that on the existing site, but that's not fun and I wouldn't want to ask anyone to do it.
Thanks for the proposal, that's some interesting and useful stuff I hadn't seen before. Some of it is very good and I'd like to see expressed much more clearly.
Ultimately this doesn't change my mind, the project goes on the board with a higher priority than fixes, and then we see where that leads.