feat: new website - #481
Conversation
![github-advanced-security[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/57789?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
21aed24 to
dc7002e
Compare
e7169b5 to
4f57200
Compare
|
👏 |
Astro exposes BASE_URL verbatim from the base config; with base: '/'
that meant withBase('/ecosystem') returned '//ecosystem', which the
browser resolves as the protocol-relative URL http://ecosystem and
navigates away from the site.
|
@fastify/core @fastify/collaborators this is now ready to be reviewed! |
|
One question: shouldn't we exclude the Otherwise, LGTM is fine 🔥 🚀 ✅ |
@Tony133 I kept them just because those are the "rules" we need to keep style coherent when we will change in the future |
ok 👍🏻 |
|
I don't think we should keep Agent files here, or we should ask why they are relevant on this repository and not the others? |
I've answered here to this question. |
This answer is valid for any repository of the org. |
I disagree with this. In the other repositories of the fastify's org, whatever way in which you code is fine: the important thing is the result you bring in. |
No, but the Agent "understand" the context of the project so it guesses mostly right how to perform an update of the code base.
I don't think this would be different for a website, the agent is gonna "wonder" how to implement things coherently with the existing. I personally don't care if we keep specific skills in some repositories, but I don't see it as more necessary for the website then some other plugins with sensible logic. |
|
My POV: For example, the |
|
As I imagined, the I checked the Not all but we can easily add them. If this repository is an exception, we can of course let it slide. That said, I don't think folders such as In any case, I'd follow what @mcollina is doing. If he is excluding these folders, I think it makes sense for us to follow the same approach across the repositories. 🙂 As for the website, the skills could be moved to a separate repository ( Most importantly, I don't think this PR should be blocked by three "AI folders" 😄, especially given the time and effort that has already gone into it. If these folders are the main issue preventing the new site from being released, we can temporarily exclude them and move forward. 🚀 |
It is not. I just kindly ask to get the opportunity to review the website content, as it concerns every collaborator. |
ok 😄👍🏻 |
I’m not familiar with every convention around skills, and I don’t have a strong opinion about which directory they use. My concern is that We could still explicitly track repository-specific skills. But the skills in this PR seems to be generic third-party skills. They are in I am pro AI personally, (like I am pro TS, ESM and a lot of other things), but this is not the case of every contributor so I care about their feedback too. It's not just me wanting to annoy people about AI files. |
jean-michelet
left a comment
jean-michelet
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It looks good overall.
Minor suggestion: perhaps we should avoid em dashes (—). They are perfectly valid punctuation, but many people now strongly associate them with AI slope.
| Fast and low overhead.<br /> | ||
| <span class="text-velocity">For Node.js.</span> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This sounds slightly awkward, and the original wording A fast, low-overhead web framework for Node.js. (IMO was much better) seems to have been sacrificed for styling reasons.
| with the least overhead. A powerful plugin architecture, schema-based | ||
| speed, and one of the fastest cores in Node.js. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
schema-based speed, and one of the fastest cores in Node.js.
I think it's very unclear what that means.
Maybe something like this?
Fastify is a web framework focused on delivering the best possible developer experience with minimal overhead and a powerful plugin architecture.
| <h2 | ||
| class="mt-4 font-display text-3xl font-semibold tracking-tight sm:text-4xl" | ||
| > | ||
| Built on solid principles |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This section mixes concrete features with broader principles and qualities, so neither former "Core features" nor "Built on solid principles" fully describes it.
I think "Core strengths" or similar would be more accurate. It also avoids possible confusion with Robert C. Martin’s SOLID principles 😆
| invert?: boolean; | ||
| }; | ||
|
|
||
| export const SPONSORS: Sponsor[] = [ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
On a lot of websites, we not only mention sponsors, but also major companies using the framework.
@fastify/collaborators Are you aware of big tech or other relevant tech companies using the framework?
We could perform a deep search with an agent to retrieve evidences of companies mentioning using Fastify.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Are you aware of big tech or other relevant tech companies using the framework?
We can't do that - this was another debate.
Once upon a time, a Microsoft dev was on the team and we had the MS logo on the website, but when he moved to another job, we had to remove it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We can't do that - this was another debate.
Because we're part of OpenJS?
7 participants
Description
As discussed, this PR is to introduce here the new website.
Related Issues
Check List