[bug#52596,guix-artwork] website: Relabel stable/latest to release/current.

* website/apps/base/templates/components.scm (navbar): Relabel.
* website/apps/base/templates/help.scm (help-t): Relabel.
* website/apps/download/templates/download-latest.scm (download-latest-t):
Relabel.
---

Hi,

This discussion [1] points that the current label stable/latest for:

 - things related to release
 - things related to current master

is confusing.  Mainly because 'stable' has other meaning in other distro.
Moreover, 'latest' does not imply less stable or buggy than 'stable' itself.

Instead, the label 'release/current' appears to be more accurate for a
rolling-release.

WDYT?

1: <http://logs.guix.gnu.org/guix/2021-12-17.log#201813>

Cheers,
simon

 website/apps/base/templates/components.scm          |  8 ++++----
 website/apps/base/templates/help.scm                |  7 +++----
 website/apps/download/templates/download-latest.scm | 13 +++++++------
 3 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)


base-commit: ceaad7ee0c237fc5cd58a542247e9eaaea68e2bf

Hello simon.  Thank you for the patch, even though I disagree.

On Sat, Dec 18, 2021 at 11:40:38AM +0100, zimoun wrote:
> This discussion [1] points that the current label stable/latest for:
> 
>  - things related to release
>  - things related to current master
> 
> is confusing.  Mainly because 'stable' has other meaning in other distro.
> Moreover, 'latest' does not imply less stable or buggy than 'stable' itself.
> 
> Instead, the label 'release/current' appears to be more accurate for a
> rolling-release.
> 
> WDYT?
> 
> 1: <http://logs.guix.gnu.org/guix/2021-12-17.log#201813>

The term 'release' seems technical and hard-to-translate.  Stable may
raise wrong expectations, but one word cannot convey all the
difference between the images anyway.  I think the criticism of our QA
is too negative, even though more QA would have been better.

However there are few reasons to read the stable manual.  Hmm.

> diff --git a/website/apps/base/templates/help.scm b/website/apps/base/templates/help.scm
> index 3d54ae1..fb25bd5 100644
> --- a/website/apps/base/templates/help.scm
> +++ b/website/apps/base/templates/help.scm
> @@ -51,7 +51,7 @@ system|GNU Hurd|GNU Guix package manager|Help resources") #\|)
>              online.  You may also find more information about Guix by running "
>              ,(G_ `(code "info guix")) "."))
>          (p
> -         ,(link-more #:label (G_ "Read stable manual")
> +         ,(link-more #:label `(G_ "Read manual " ,(latest-guix-version) "")

This should be

,(link-more #:label (G_ (string-append "Read manual " (latest-guix-version) "")))

with string-append like further below for

     ,(G_ (string-append "Page " (number->string active-page) " of "
                         (number->string pages) ". Go to another page: ")))


>           ,(link-more #:label (G_ "Read latest manual")
>                       #:url (guix-url "manual/devel/" #:localize #f))))
> diff --git a/website/apps/download/templates/download-latest.scm b/website/apps/download/templates/download-latest.scm
> [...]
>     #:content
>     `(main
>       (section
>        (@ (class "page"))
> -      ,(G_ `(h2 "Download latest images"))
> +      ,(G_ `(h2 "Download latest developement images"))

There is a typo, but more importantly the meaning of development
images is hard to understand.

This is a difficult topic. ;)

Regards,
Florian

Hi Florian,

Thanks for your comments.

On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 at 16:22, pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)
<pelzflorian@pelzflorian.de> wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 18, 2021 at 11:40:38AM +0100, zimoun wrote:
> > This discussion [1] points that the current label stable/latest for:
> >
> >  - things related to release
> >  - things related to current master
> >
> > is confusing.  Mainly because 'stable' has other meaning in other distro.
> > Moreover, 'latest' does not imply less stable or buggy than 'stable' itself.
> >
> > Instead, the label 'release/current' appears to be more accurate for a
> > rolling-release.
> >
> > WDYT?
> >
> > 1: <http://logs.guix.gnu.org/guix/2021-12-17.log#201813>
>
> The term 'release' seems technical and hard-to-translate.  Stable may
> raise wrong expectations, but one word cannot convey all the
> difference between the images anyway.  I think the criticism of our QA
> is too negative, even though more QA would have been better.

I do not have a strong opinion about the term to replace 'stable'.
However, I have a strong opinion that this label stable/latest is
confusing, at least in the nav bar.  Especially if you come from other
distros.  For instance, stable never receives fixes, so it is not
'stable' but 'frozen'.

Initially, I wanted to replace 'stable' by the current version number;
something using (latest-guix-version).  I think it is the best: clear
and easy to translate.  However, I had some hard time with all these
quote, backquote, unquote, so I gave up. :-)


> However there are few reasons to read the stable manual.  Hmm.

One reason at least is to have this manual open when you are
installing or playing with the images inside a VM, etc.


> This should be
>
> ,(link-more #:label (G_ (string-append "Read manual " (latest-guix-version) "")))

Thanks.

> > -      ,(G_ `(h2 "Download latest images"))
> > +      ,(G_ `(h2 "Download latest developement images"))
>
> There is a typo, but more importantly the meaning of development
> images is hard to understand.

Indeed typo. :-)

> This is a difficult topic. ;)

Yeah, naming is a difficult topic.  I think that 'stable/latest' is an
inaccurate label for what it really is.  I think it should be
'1.3.0/current' or whatever better for current.

In French website, 'latest' is translated as 'Développement' and
'actuel'; which are both more accurate that 'latest' and they could be
translated back as 'current'.


Cheers,
simon

Hi simon.

What matters is that users try first to install with the stable Guix
System image, because it is more likely to succeed, but if it does not
succeed, they can try the other one.  In this regard, the terms
stable/latest seem fine to me.  1.3.0/current might reverse the order.

On Sat, Dec 18, 2021 at 04:43:57PM +0100, zimoun wrote:
> However, I have a strong opinion that this label stable/latest is
> confusing, at least in the nav bar.  Especially if you come from other
> distros.  For instance, stable never receives fixes, so it is not
> 'stable' but 'frozen'.

The discussion on IRC provess you right that users get confused.


> Initially, I wanted to replace 'stable' by the current version number;
> something using (latest-guix-version).  I think it is the best: clear
> and easy to translate.  However, I had some hard time with all these
> quote, backquote, unquote, so I gave up. :-)

I agree that the "stable" manual is better described as 1.3.0 (like
what your patch does) and not as stable.  But I am unsure if the
stable manual is needed at all.  You have a more experienced judgment
here though.

Regards,
Florian

Hi Florian,

On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 at 20:36, "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" <pelzflorian@pelzflorian.de> wrote:

> What matters is that users try first to install with the stable Guix
> System image, because it is more likely to succeed, but if it does not
> succeed, they can try the other one.  In this regard, the terms
> stable/latest seem fine to me.  1.3.0/current might reverse the order.

I agree with the aim.  I disagree with the term to express it and I
think that ’stable’ is not clear in this regard.  That’s why I proposed
’release’ instead, whereas I agree it is maybe not the best for
translation.

Well, maybe ’standard / latest’?  Or something else than latest as
development, current, or whatever else.


> On Sat, Dec 18, 2021 at 04:43:57PM +0100, zimoun wrote:
>> However, I have a strong opinion that this label stable/latest is
>> confusing, at least in the nav bar.  Especially if you come from other
>> distros.  For instance, stable never receives fixes, so it is not
>> 'stable' but 'frozen'.
>
> The discussion on IRC provess you right that users get confused.

I also see the same confusion here and there.  Often I answer that once
clicked, the download page explains what it is and thus one just has to
read to the difference.  That’s not true for the manual though.

Read explanation for something intuitive implies something is not
optimal, hence the proposed patch and discussion. :-)


>> Initially, I wanted to replace 'stable' by the current version number;
>> something using (latest-guix-version).  I think it is the best: clear
>> and easy to translate.  However, I had some hard time with all these
>> quote, backquote, unquote, so I gave up. :-)
>
> I agree that the "stable" manual is better described as 1.3.0 (like
> what your patch does) and not as stable.  But I am unsure if the
> stable manual is needed at all.  You have a more experienced judgment
> here though.

Well, keep the frozen manual for the current release is another
question.  For sure, I never use it and I never point to it.

I lack imagination and the only user-case I can think of is: read it
using another device while installing.

Therefore, maybe it would simplify if the navbar Help would contain only
“Guix Manual”.  And the navbar Download would contain Standard, where
the Standard webpage would contain a link for the manual in case it is
useful.

Instead of Standard, it could be (latest-guix-version) but I failed to
do it. :-)

 WDYT?


Cheers,
simon

Note that <https://www.gnu.org/manual/> points to
<https://www.gnu.org/software/guix/manual/>.

On Sun, Dec 19, 2021 at 10:21:29AM +0100, zimoun wrote:
> Therefore, maybe it would simplify if the navbar Help would contain only
> “Guix Manual”.  And the navbar Download would contain Standard, where
> the Standard webpage would contain a link for the manual in case it is
> useful.

Yes.  I agree with your patch if Release is replaced by Standard and
the (G_ "Read manual ") is replaced as I wrote in my first mail and
the typo is addressed.

OK, the 1.3.0 manual is probably needed when changing the config file.
I do not know if it is needed on foreign distros.

R.I.P. stable, but you have shown there is confusion.

I have not test-built the website with the patch yet though.

Regards,
Florian

Removing/reordering manual links could be another patch.

On Sun, Dec 19, 2021 at 11:40:57AM +0100, pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) wrote:
> I have not test-built the website with the patch yet though.

LGTM.

Regards,
Florian