A.M. Kuchling wrote:
richard <richardjones (AT) optushome (DOT) com.auwrote:
So I did what people always do in this situation, I asked Barry Warsaw to
name. it. And he did, "Cheese Shop". I liked the name, so it was done. When
the new pydotorg machines went live last year, so too did the name
cheeseshop.python.org
Given the endless whiny complaints about the name, though, I think we
should just give up and go back to PyPI (pronounced 'Pippy').
just change the link on the main site to read "packages", change the self-
references on the cheeseshop.python.org page to "Packages" or "Package
Index", move the quote down to the bottom of the page, and and leave
the rest as is.
</F>

just change the link on the main site to read "packages"
and while you're at it, change "python-dev" to "developers" and
"psf" to "foundation" (or use a title on that link).
</F>

Fredrik Lundh wrote:
>>just change the link on the main site to read "packages"

and while you're at it, change "python-dev" to "developers" and
"psf" to "foundation" (or use a title on that link).

</F>

For most people 'developers' would mean people developing *with* python,
not developing python.

Also 'Foundation' could be confused with 'beginners' or 'basic'.

Tim Parkin

Tim Parkin wrote:

For most people 'developers' would mean people developing *with* python,
not developing python.

the page it leads has headings that say "Python Developers Guide" and
"Links for Developers", and contains links about "Development Process",
"Developer FAQ", etc.

I'm convinced that people visiting python.org can distinguish between
"using python to develop stuff" and "developing python", but that's me.

Also 'Foundation' could be confused with 'beginners' or 'basic'.

while "PSF" is completely incomprehensible for someone who doesn't
already know what it is why even keep it on the front page ?

(give it its own section on the community page instead. the link is
already there; all it needs is a heading and a short blurb).

</F>

Fredrik Lundh wrote:
Tim Parkin wrote:


>>For most people 'developers' would mean people developing *with* python,
>>not developing python.

the page it leads has headings that say "Python Developers Guide" and
"Links for Developers", and contains links about "Development Process",
"Developer FAQ", etc.
I think telling people they are in the wrong place isn't quite as good
as helping them get to the right place.

I'm convinced that people visiting python.org can distinguish between
"using python to develop stuff" and "developing python", but that's me.
Simple user questions (i.e. asking people what they think a 'developers'
link would lead to on a programming site) suggests that the majority of
people think differently to you.

>>Also 'Foundation' could be confused with 'beginners' or 'basic'.

while "PSF" is completely incomprehensible for someone who doesn't
already know what it is why even keep it on the front page ?
Usability says that people choose the first appropriate link to click
on. They will only click on psf if they already know what it is. If it
was called *foundation* and they were a beginner then they may well
click on 'foundation'. If they wanted to know about the support and
community behind python, that material should be obviously placed under
'community' and the information should also be under 'about'.

Navigation usability isn't about trying to make every link mean
something to every user, it's about making sure that for each use case,
a clear path to the information is available. The difference is subtle
but important.

Calling the link *foundation* goes halfway to solving the problem in the
wrong place.

(give it its own section on the community page instead. the link is
already there; all it needs is a heading and a short blurb).

It was in the community section but most people wanted it back on the
top level.

Tim Parkin

Tim Parkin wrote:

Simple user questions (i.e. asking people what they think a 'developers'
link would lead to on a programming site) suggests that the majority of
people think differently to you.

so where's this mythical user group that you're using for the site testing ?

</F>

Fredrik Lundh wrote:

>Tim Parkin wrote:
>

>
>>Simple user questions (i.e. asking people what they think a 'developers'
>>link would lead to on a programming site) suggests that the majority of
>>people think differently to you.
>
>>
>
>so where's this mythical user group that you're using for the site testing ?
>
></F>
>
>

freinds and colleagues both online and off Some of whom are python
programmers, most not. Without a budget for 'comprehensive testing' then
the next best thing is asking people, at least you'll generally get rid
of the big bloopers it's typically referred to as guerilla testing and
whilst not scientific, it's better than nothing at all.

Tim Parkin

3/12/06, Tim Parkin <tim (AT) pollenation (DOT) netwrote:
freinds and colleagues both online and off Some of whom are python
programmers, most not. Without a budget for 'comprehensive testing' then
the next best thing is asking people, at least you'll generally get rid
of the big bloopers it's typically referred to as guerilla testing and
whilst not scientific, it's better than nothing at all.

I consider myself a Python developer, and if I saw a 'Developers' link
on a Python site, it would seem obvious that it would be something
that might interest me. It would not occur to me that this referred to
people who are developing the language itself.