Rebuild the people page around one record per person - #273
Conversation
✅ Deploy Preview for jade-cajeta-1bcca0 ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration. |
The page was an org chart: eight sections, one per governance body, every person a grey rectangle. Because a person belongs to several bodies, the front matter duplicated them — Isaac Virshup was listed twice with a stale Twitter link in one copy, Lukas Heumos twice with two affiliations. Role, affiliation and e-mail were all present in the data but only revealed on hover, so they were invisible on mobile and to keyboard users. Invert the model: `[[people]]`, each carrying the roles it holds, and let the page take views over that list. The Steering Council keeps its own section; everyone else is reachable through a filterable directory with role and package chips, deep-linkable as /people/?role=council. Avatars come from the GitHub profile URL where there is one and fall back to a tinted monogram, and work areas that name a package we ship an icon for render with its logo. The contributor wall opens the page rather than closing it, folded by default so it does not bury the content on a phone. The Community section held no people, only links to Zulip, Discourse, X and Bluesky — all of which /join already lists — so it is a pointer in the lead paragraph now. Also scope the site chrome's header rule to a direct child of body: it was styling any <header> a page happened to use. Closes #272 Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
66f8665 to
8b5bd22
Compare
The council had its own grid above the directory, which repeated four cards and left them ragged against each other. It is a role chip and a badge now, reachable at /people/?role=council. Pin each card's link row to the bottom while we are here: cards in a row carry different numbers of badges, so the rows only lined up by accident. Give the lead a measure closer to the mosaic below it — at 42rem under a 75rem wall of avatars it wrapped three times and read as stray breaks.
|
Claude pointed out that "The page was an org chart", but isn't that what we actually want? |
At ~150 characters it wrapped no matter what measure it was given. The community half of the sentence belongs with the contributor wall anyway, so /join moves into that caption and the lead keeps only /about/roles. Lift the expand toggle out of the caption while we are here: sitting inside the sentence it read as a third link rather than a control.
I'm still iterating and yes, I also stumbled over this. I hope though that we can make it prettier and more searchable like the new suggestion. I'll think about having the best of both worlds. Could you please check out the draft and tell me whether this went into a direction you support? |
It said "scverse" three times in one sentence. Trimming the repetition gets it under the column width, and the max-width that was holding it to 58rem under a full-width wall of avatars can go with it.
The people directory lists the bodies but shows them as seven peers. The relationships are only asserted in prose here — the steering council are core team members, core developers are core team members, the core team are contributors — and flat headings cannot show that. The chart is an index, not a summary: each box carries a name, a headcount read live from the people page, and links to its own section below and to who currently holds it. No description is repeated. Also repoint /people/#core-team, which the people redesign removed, at the directory filter that replaced it.
for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci
The governance document and the announcement blog post both use that name; the people page was the only place calling it a committee. Take the chart's four named bodies from the people data rather than repeating them, so the two pages cannot disagree about a name again. The role id stays "advisory", so /people/?role=advisory still resolves.
|
@grst I think we could have the "org chart" be in |
The core team divides into core developers, core community and core governance, and the steering council is drawn from the governance side rather than sitting directly under the core team as drawn before. The document only names one of the three sub-teams, so core community and core governance point at the core team section until it covers them.
The boxes say what they are.
They are top-level bodies alongside the community rather than a footnote under it, so they join the outer level and share its background instead of sitting in their own list. Drop the steering council's tint while we are here — it read as more important than the boxes around it rather than as one of them.
|
Yes that sounds good. |
Each governance section ends with who currently holds the role, read from the people page's front matter so the two cannot drift. The steering council, management committee and advisory board fit on one line each; the core team runs to three. Names go in the sections rather than the chart — two dozen of them inside a diagram box would be unreadable — and drop the generic paragraph-link underline, which turned a roster into a wall of rules.
I was thinking in this box: 
Then one would see it all at one glance. Currently we only have "core team" in the overview. Can't we already add core governance vs core dev or are we still lacking formalization? |
|
I explicitly avoided it in this box because I feared it'd look ugly. I can try. No, we have the fornalization but many names will be duplicated. |
# Conflicts: # assets/main.scss
|
@grst played a bit with it and honestly, I don't think it's nice to cram the names into the boxes. Is this a blocker for you or are you fine with them not being in the boxes? Does it generally look okay to you? |
grst
left a comment
grst
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this a blocker for you or are you fine with them not being in the boxes?
Not the hill I'm going to die on.
Maybe the people in the roles page could be styled a bit differently (greyish color or something). I think they currently blend in too much with the text.
Co-authored-by: Gregor Sturm <mail@gregor-sturm.de>
for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci
The names on the roles page read as part of the sentence above them. Give each roster a tinted block, mute the names and drop them a size, so it reads as a list rather than a continuation of the paragraph. Answer @grst on the people page: the wall above it is 390 contributors, so the directory needs to say that these are the people holding a role. The people-section-text rule went with the steering council section it was written for; restore it, since the new line uses it.
|
A better distinction of the teams on the roles page will be a follow up. I think it's an improvement now so I'll take the liberty of merging it and following up if there's any issues. |
2 participants
Closes #272. Replaces the org-chart layout with one record per person (
[[people]]carrying the roles it holds), so nobody is duplicated in the front matter and the Steering Council section, the directory and the search are all views over the same list. Adds avatars, package logos, role/package filters and moves the contributor wall to the top; the Community section is gone since/joinalready lists those links.