Added pages for "Contact" and "About"

[toby63]

-Also moves "Sponsors" to the footer menu

The website is missing some general content most websites offer.
It also makes you a bit more trust-worthy and transparent.

Some of it might even be a legal requirement.

Fixes #126 and #98.

[Krzmbrzl]

The contact details are also listed on the Contribute page so if we introduce a special Contact page, we should remove the info from there and link to the contact page instead.

For the About page I would say that this kind of information is partially covered by the main page. It also contains some words about the project...

[toby63]

The contact details are also listed on the Contribute page so if we introduce a special Contact page, we should remove the info from there and link to the contact page instead.

I disagree, the Contribute page lists these things for community participation.
So the purpose is different and should therefore be mentioned in both cases.

For the About page I would say that this kind of information is partially covered by the main page. It also contains some words about the project...

As I already said in #98, it does not cover what this should really be about.
For a software website it is obvious what the software is, but the interesting parts for an about page are: who are you, who is running this etc.

[Krzmbrzl]

I disagree, the Contribute page lists these things for community participation.
So the purpose is different and should therefore be mentioned in both cases.

But the means of contact are the same. Thus you'd only be duplicating the information which is never a good idea.

For a software website it is obvious what the software is, but the interesting parts for an about page are: who are you, who is running this etc.

That's why I wrote partially ☝️

[toby63]

But the means of contact are the same. Thus you'd only be duplicating the information which is never a good idea.

No.
You have:

1. Community: Which means users (and team)
2. Contact: Which means searching for contact to the team.

Thus you'd only be duplicating the information which is never a good idea.

It is done very often.
Of course information can be outdated here and be new there, but your website is quite small, so it should be manageable.

That's why I wrote partially ☝️

I saw that, but it seemed, that you used it as an argument against an about page.
So thats the point.

[Krzmbrzl]

No.
You have:
Community: Which means users (and team)
Contact: Which means searching for contact to the team.

There no reason why these two ways of contacting can't live on the same page.

It is done very often.

It is indeed. But it is never good to do that.

Of course information can be outdated here and be new there, but your website is quite small, so it should be manageable.

But it has to be done and especially: remembered. That's the issue

[toby63]

There no reason why these two ways of contacting can't live on the same page.

There is, those are two different categories:

1. Contribution -> Community (Channels)
2. Contact to the Mumble Team

I don't see why and how that can be on the same page, also because there are different contents for both.

[Krzmbrzl]

They don't differ as we as a team are also reachable on the e.g. IRC. Thus effectively there is no difference. Any user can choose what they think is an appropriate means of communicating with us.

[toby63]

They don't differ as we as a team are also reachable on the e.g. IRC. Thus effectively there is no difference. Any user can choose what they think is an appropriate means of communicating with us.

Well you mean a different level than I do, but instead of continuing this...

What would be your solution?
Should I link to the Community section (in Contribute) on the contact page?
Or vice versa?
Or what is your exact idea?

---

Another idea would be some kind of template that could be included, like the download templates.
Of course it has to be a bit different, just like a text box.

This way you would have the list in one place.

[Krzmbrzl]

Or what is your exact idea?

My idea is to summarize all means of contacting in the Contact page and then linking to that every time we want to provide contact information (e.g. from the Contribute page).

Another idea would be some kind of template that could be included, like the download templates.
Of course it has to be a bit different, just like a text box.
This way you would have the list in one place.

Definitely a lot better than duplicating the information in source. However I think it is better to link to a contact page instead. I mean that's kinda what links are for 🤷

[toby63]

My idea is to summarize all means of contacting in the Contact page and then linking to that every time we want to provide contact information (e.g. from the Contribute page).

If thats what you want; I will at least add a seperate category to the Contact page to seperate between Community Channels and other Contact possibilities like Email etc.

---

What about the About page now?
And could we discuss some of the questions I raised (see commits)?

[Krzmbrzl]

If thats what you want; I will at least add a seperate category to the Contact page to seperate between Community Channels and other Contact possibilities like Email etc.

Sounds good.

What about the About page now?

Well idk what I would want to put there since I don't think this to be vital in the first place. But then again I never look at About pages of other projects (as long as I find information on the actual software I am interested in elsewhere) 🤷

[toby63]

I have moved Contact to the first place in the footer.
And added About to the main menu and moved Sponsors to the footer.

[Kissaki]

Suggestion: It would be nice if the commit description and PR description would mention the menu being moved, and reasoning for it. (Space)
That’s a significant change of existing concept/content.

Thought for later: I think we have an opportunity to implement clickable and readable links and should do so eventually. I presume you put it in like this so they are not easily discoverable by bots/crawlers. Which is fine for now.

[Kissaki]

I feel undervalued. Is this descriptive of what role I have here and what I have contributed?

[Krzmbrzl]

I feel this should represents the current situation (that's also why Thorvald isn't listed at all).
Nonetheless you are free to suggest a different role description here. This was just my original suggestion and since you did not answer on my ping on this topic, we left it at that 🤷

[toby63]

@Krzmbrzl Could you maybe talk about this in one of your team meetings, so that we could have an accurate representation of every team member?
@Kissaki What would you like as a description?

[Kissaki]

Whatever

[toby63]

"Whatever" is not really a good answer. Maybe other team members want a different description etc. as well. I will wait for the results of your team meeting, thus will unresolve this.

[Kissaki]

Ok, nice.

I mark some small cleanups. I do not consider them blockers, but would like them resolved still.

For the commit message:
Please use present tense for commit messages. "Add pages" instead of "Added pages".
Do not end commit title with a fullstop (it’s not a sentence but a title).

I tried to find a definite reference for this, but have difficulty finding it right now. Anyway, present tense is the convention, starting from the Git project itself.

Otherwise LGTM.

[toby63]

Ok, will upload a fix for that.

Some last questions:

1. I noticed that the element.io link (https://app.element.io/#/room/#mumble:matrix.org) requires a registration, so should we really mention that? (it's on the contact page and also on the contribute page)
2. Do you want to mention the sponsors page on the about page?
3. Should we add a special thanks for @thorvald etc.?

[Krzmbrzl]

1. Yes we absolutely should. Plain IRC is just a nightmare to use if you're not online 24/7. With Element you get persistent messages which is a very important feature that allows you to drop a question and come back later to see if someone answered.
2. I think we don't have to put it there. That's probably not interesting for folks visiting that page
3. I don't think this is interesting for the reader either. If they want to know who contributed, they can visit the Contribute GitHub page and there's a full list. Imo that's enough 🤷

[toby63]

I added the suggestions by @Kissaki.

I also changed the headers.

---

Regarding the questions:

1. One alternative would be that I at least put a note there that it requires registration.
2. I only brought it up, because now the Sponsors page is moved to the footer. So it would get a bit more attention this way.
3. I think some people would deserve it. I also saw it on other projects websites, something like "honorable members" or similar.

[Kissaki]

The commit is now present tense instead of past, but still does not follow the recommended format.

Adds pages "About" & "Contact"

Adds "About" to the menu and moves "Sponsors" to footer.
Adds "Contact" to footer.

To follow convention it should be

Add pages "About" & "Contact"

Add "About" to the menu and moves "Sponsors" to footer.
Add "Contact" to footer.

Think of it not as describing what the commit does, but describing what the change itself does. The change is the subject. The change that is applied to source code. And it is a description of what that change does.

I feel like this explanation sucks. Anyway, I don’t have anything better right now.

[Krzmbrzl]

One alternative would be that I at least put a note there that it requires registration.

Nah I don't like that. People will find that out simply by clicking the link. And it is not like they are automatically registering anywhere just by clicking the link.
Besides: I think that 99% of all users visiting that link also don't expect to be able to participate without registration 🤷

I think some people would deserve it. I also saw it on other projects websites, something like "honorable members" or similar.

Personally I am not interested in this kind of stuff when I look at such a page. If you (or someone else) think that it should be done though, I don't have any objections to adding such a section to the bottom.
Doing so would however raise the question of when a contributor will be listed here 🤷

[toby63]

@Kissaki I understand, though I think it's a little weird, but you are correct that it is mostly done this way.

@Krzmbrzl Ok, in that case I think we should use this as is and maybe someone will add something in the future.

Ready for merge.

[Krzmbrzl]

Thank you for your contribution :)