to satisfy your demand on nostalgic felling triggers you could use the wayback machine
so there is actual no need to request the site to look outdated

I don't mind the site design; in fact, I think the simple-yet-functional layout suits Slackware well. I just think it would be a good idea to make it a little more obvious that things are still happening. Maybe have a notice at the top saying when the last update in -current occurred, with a link to the ChangeLog. If possible, this could be updated automatically so that it's literally no extra work for Pat after the initial setup. (I don't know much about web design, so I don't know if that is possible.)

2 members found this post helpful.

what on earth is that ?

Great Scott this is heavy!

https://web.archive.org/web/19971224...slackware.com/

snapshots of the Slackware homepage at various moments in time. didn't you understand it? it's the internet archive. why do you get mad about that

Seeing Walnut Creek ads is just a wow moment.

1 members found this post helpful.

I feel like one side here is asking for some changes to the website that would be about as minor as possible (Hell, one person suggested simply using the ChangeLog as the homepage, requiring virtually no change/extra effort by anyone), while the other side is equating *any* suggested change with adding Flash animations or going off the deep end in altering the website.

I think most everyone here, to at least some extent, likes the minimal design and simplicity of both Slackware and its website. And while I can get behind, "if someone isn't willing to help themselves, Slackware might not be for them," I've also seen this question asked twice recently (once here and once on Reddit). Making a minor tweak to at least showcase that Slackware is active might not be a bad thing.

Of course, were it entirely up to me, I'd give a quick once-over to the whole site; removing some random tid-bits re:Y2K and other things that are clearly not relevant in 2016, and then either add ChangeLog entries to the main page, or make it the main page. I'm happy to have people thinking Slackware is old, stodgy stalwart in the Linux world, but I'm okay doing just enough to not have people thinking it's out-right dead.

7 members found this post helpful.

Very sensible comment. Yes. Slackware has a minimalist flavor (e.g., the lack of an apt-like package manager) and the website reflects that. But ... I think the lack of communication on the website in 3.5 years is more than a bit much. OpenBSD is pretty Spartan, too, and they commit to releasing every six months, and they do it. Now I realize that OpenBSD has control of their destiny a lot more than Patrick has control of the chaos that is Linux, but they are communicative on their website and on their mailing lists. Hardly a day goes by when you don't see a post from Theo de Raadt on openbsd.misc. And he is managing the development of the system, contributing to it as a programmer and leading the release engineering. So I think it's not excessive to ask Patrick to be a bit more forthcoming about his plans for Slackware, especially after 3.5 years. You shouldn't have to rummage through the changelogs to figure out that the project isn't dead, in my opinion.

6 members found this post helpful.

here is a suggestion. Use Slackware the way it is, let PV and the team change or not change as they see fit. If you want a shiny coat use something else, if you want Slack who cares about the website. The site has all of the relevant data on it, last release was 2013 so what, changelog reflects changes...imagine that revolutionary thought. This distro is for those who are not afraid to do some digging and some work. Guess what, when 14.2 is released it will appear on the site...then you can complain again in 2-3 years.

I hope this is not a trend of those fleeing the unmentionable init and the buntus...they already frigged up Debian.

4 members found this post helpful.

There's no difference between the OpenBSD site and the Slackware site: they both point to the latest release, help, downloads, general information, and whatever else the visitor needs. As for participating on the forums, Theo de Raadt posts regularly at openbsd.misc and Patrick Volkerding posts regularly at this forum. Again, what's the difference? As for Patrick's plans for Slackware, perhaps they're the same as they have been for the last 23 years: "Since its first beta release in April of 1993, the Slackware Linux Project has aimed at producing the most 'Unix-like' Linux distribution out there". This information is readily available at the Slackware website - just one click takes you to it. Do you think this philosophy is suddenly going to change 23 years later, for no good reason?

And yes, consulting the changelogs, not "rummaging through" them, as you put it, is in fact the best way to determine whether or not a project is dead. It's quite simple: you visit the home page and then you click on ChangeLogs. That takes you to the changelog for your architecture, which for my platform, amd64, shows that in just the last week I've had changes to thunderbird, the kernel, lvm, imagemagick, mercurial, lxc, openvpn and mesa, among others. Significant changes, I'm sure you'd agree, to a dead project.

If you disagree, I'd be really interested to know how else you propose to check whether or not Slackware is dead. What other way is there besides the forum and the changelogs?

It's Devuan now. A more sane and better managed system that is maintained by a small group rather than an over bloated committee that can't communicate with it's own subcommittees and follow it's own constitution.

You could say Devuan took a more Slackware-like approach to managing their distribution. Less cooks, less mess to clean up in the kitchen. And many wish them well and a successful distribution.

1 members found this post helpful.

I think it'd be tacky to just have the changelog be the homepage. It isn't github, you don't need to have all of that mess dumped right in your face if you aren't looking for it.

I like the front page as is, but I can see why some would consider Slackware a dead project due to the lack of updates on the site. If something were to be done, I think simply adding a box that contains the date for latest changelog entry for the stable and -current versions of Slackware (with links to the actual changelogs) would be the most Slackware-like way. This would be a minimal addition (in appearance) to the page and gives people the sense that work is progressing. But, someone would have to code it, and maybe they're more interested in pumping out updates to Slackware itself (which I am totally fine with).

First off, your math is wrong it is 2.5 years, not 3.5 (Nov 2013 to Mayish 2016)

Second, a project is based on the developer. Some developers are much more vocal (Eric), where others tend to just push out new updates (Pat), and others ride a more middle line (possibly Robby and Stuart). There is no right method. Pat is not Theo de Raadt, and he doesn't need to provide daily interactions with people for his work to progress. Maybe Theo enjoys having a lot of discussions with his users and maybe Pat likes to keep things simple. However, based on Pat's relatively few responses on the forum and changelog entries, even if he doesn't constantly talk on the forum, he does read it pretty frequently.

1 members found this post helpful.

U GOT IT baby !

Yes, I do think they were inspired by Slackware. Their vdev program/project looks interesting as well. Might be a good replacement for eudev/udev.

https://github.com/jcnelson/vdev

ooh, working on a port for OpenBSD as well:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11609980

https://www.linuxquestions.org/quest...5529858-print/

Not a bad idea, but, I'm perfectly happy with the Slackware site as is. There's a link on the Slackware site that takes you to the -current and stable changelogs. Anyone who knows what a changelog is can click on it.
Indeed. I would much rather that Pat and the developers focus on putting the finishing touches to 14.2.