royale-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Carlos Rovira <>
Subject Re: Apache Royale static web site
Date Sat, 28 Oct 2017 20:12:15 GMT
Thanks Yishay for your words

2017-10-28 19:09 GMT+02:00 Yishay Weiss <>:

> Carlos, I agree that our resources are limited and this this might not be
> the best way to spend them at this point. However, there are some points
> that have not been mentioned in this discussion that make me think we
> should try to move our site to Royale.
> One is that we claim to be different to other frameworks in that overhead
> can be much smaller. A site that performs at the level of a classic static
> site would be a significant proof of concept. If it doesn’t perform well
> enough we’ll have some information on where we can improve in that regard.
> Related, we need to finally start eating our dog food. The more visible
> our dog food, the more feedback we’ll get.
> Also, if new people really want to contribute to out site, I’d much rather
> have them learn Royale than WP.

That's ok. I  only said that we are run out of resources and I don't see
many people available to make this effort.
In my case, my plan was to focus on design to bring something good to
production, but didn't expect such problems with something we should put
online, complete with real content and focus on other things.
In my case, I would prefer to donate my tiny time in other things more
needed. In concrete I prefer to donate in "theme" feature, styling express,
and so on...
But if someone wants to work on replicate the site with Royale our other
html plain code, that's right.

> In other words, whether or not Royale ends up being a good tool for
> classic web sites I see some reasons to try and achieve that for our own
> site.
> Finally, suppose I wanted to replicate your site in Royale just for the
> heck of it. Would that be ok from a legal stand-point? I couldn’t
> understand that from the thread so far.

If we recreate the site with our own set of CSS, JS, that's right. Nobody
could say us nothing since no commercial code is involved there.
As well, If we put the actual static generated site online, without having
to upload the code to any repo, that's alright as well, since is the normal
use, and the rest of people using that theme is doing the same.

Thanks for your considerations.


> Thanks, and great work so far.

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message