Improve images and embeds - #293

You should know that the ioccc.png image comes directly from an IOCCC entry in 2011 by Matt Zucker.

That was a special prize for him. The judges at the time stated this on their website iirc.

So at the least I guess (but I am not the one to make the decision - this is just an FYI) that part won't be approved, though you clearly put a lot of effort into it and that's great.

I don't have any comments on the rest and did not look at anything else. The 'header images' just made me wonder as I remember when it was announced, the new image.

Actually try this from the repo top level directory:

git grep zucker '*.html'

and you'll see what I mean. The image links to that entry itself.

I know, I used 2011/zucker to render all of these! The problem I hit was there's no hi-res image available for embeds (social platforms will outright reject it if it's too small), so decided to make one. The header changes were really easy to make from that, so I'm not terribly attached to them.

I know, I used 2011/zucker to render all of these! The problem I hit was there's no hi-res image available for embeds (social platforms will outright reject it if it's too small), so decided to make one. The header changes were really easy to make from that, so I'm not terribly attached to them.

Yes but the thing is your version is not from the program (see below for clarification in case you used the program). That was a special thing for Mark Zucker. If you were to change it then it would no longer be authentic. There have been other entries since then that have rendered IOCCC images as I recall but this one stayed put.

Even if you used the program itself it isn't authentic in that it is not what won. Also if you changed the dimensions then it would make the judges' remarks no longer true.

Of course it's not my decision but the point of changing the logo at the time (from what it was before) for this entry was for what it produced at the time, not a higher resolution [or whatever] (which also would take longer to load) rendered 15 years later.

Anyway I don't want to discourage you (or anyone else)or anything. It was as I said just an FYI.

It's not up to me either It would seem odd to me personally to change this years later when it's past of the contest history but my view doesn't actually matter here and I do wish you the best.

I also really respect how you put the time and effort into it! That holds regardless of everything else and I genuinely mean that. Sincerity.

I am quite unwell so that's probably all I will say unless there seems to be something to reply to.

Best wishes!

We plan to review this pull request in detail, although that review might take a bit: so please be patient.

We DO APPRECIATE the effort you have put into this pull request.

We are continuing our review, @uellenberg

We made two edits to your PR, one as per the version of pandoc we are using locally. one for the update to the compressed tarballs, and one for the sitemap update.

We are going to "sleep" 😴 on this set of changes, and if all looks well the next day, commit your PR as modified, with our thanks. Stay tuned ...

@lcn2 Take your time, thanks for looking it over! I'm not at all opposed to some back-and-forth and making changes to this one.

@xexyl Sorry to hear that you're feeling unwell, I hope you recover soon! You're right, I think this warrants further discussion and I'm happy to spin it off into a separate PR. I'm a bit busy, so I'm not sure when I'll get to it though. The change that I'm trying to get in is really the social embeds, and header changes were an easy thing on top of that. My thoughts on keeping to the original version: for the first part of the website people see when they visit it, I think we should present the best version we can. It shows what the original entry is capable of more than it takes away from it because we had to change the hardcoded resolution. If nothing else, it should be the 600x220 version that the program actually outputs, and not the 300x110 downscale displayed right now. Anyway, I won't argue the point - that's for someone else to decide.

Also, one suggestion for development workflow: does GitHub actions' environment have all the packages needed for building the website? If so, you could make a workflow that builds it, then commits all the HTML files to a separate branch (e.g., gh-pages, sharing no common commits with master). Then, you can have it so the website is generated automatically and deterministically after every commit, while keeping version history and without changing the local dev workflow.

@lcn2 Take your time, thanks for looking it over! I'm not at all opposed to some back-and-forth and making changes to this one.

One thought @lcn2: as far as changing the old logo goes (and I had this thought yesterday but as you know right now things are not going well - although I do have some good news though it still will take a while): what does Mark Zucker think about it?

Because that would be the most fair way to go about it I think. For me (but again my opinion doesn't matter here as it's not my entry!) it would seem to kind of 'break' the extra prize you gave to him and who knows: maybe he would like it?

If you have his contact information of course.

@xexyl Sorry to hear that you're feeling unwell, I hope you recover soon!

Thanks. It was severe blood loss post surgery and I actually briefly lost consciousness before emergency could get the bleeding stopped (it was 20 days after the surgery).

I am extremely lucky to have been awake as I could have easily bled to death!

My iron and ferritin levels are extremely low right near the threshold. My mum had this years ago back in the 80s and I remember (we were on our way for holiday!) she had to be rushed to hospital.

It took her over a year to recover. It's bloody exhausting and other things besides. The good news is that I will be getting iron infusion so it should help and hopefully I can recover a lot more easily and much quicker than my mum did all those years ago!

I REALLY appreciate the well wishes and your understanding!

You're right, I think this warrants further discussion and I'm happy to spin it off into a separate PR.

Well my only real concern (and the social media images I don't even know that I understand the real point but I also am not familiar with anything other than I know they have little images!) was that the IOCCC logo would no longer be from the entry from 2011 and if nothing else I think if possible it would be good to ask Zucker. Maybe he would appreciate it! If nothing else he might provide useful and interesting feedback!

I'm a bit busy, so I'm not sure when I'll get to it though.

So is Landon so I am surprised he responded so quickly!

The change that I'm trying to get in is really the social embeds, and header changes were an easy thing on top of that.

Not that it matters that much and I might not have the faculties right now but what is the actual problem with what is here now?

My thoughts on keeping to the original version: for the first part of the website people see when they visit it, I think we should present the best version we can.

I guess I kind of understand that but it was also an extra prize for Zucker and it seems like if this was changed it would no longer be the case.

But on the other hand what did you actually do with the program to generate it?

And also we did do changes to others to get them to work in modern systems and other changes besides that. I played a large part in that (including presentation - I am the one who devised the try.sh system for example) but I still feel like some of the changes maybe shouldn't have been done (except for the fixing entries to work for modern systems which most people have appreciated; and although I was not the only one who did it I did more of them and I know some previous winners rather appreciated it).

It shows what the original entry is capable of more than it takes away from it because we had to change the hardcoded resolution.

Do you mean you updated the code to create a larger image? I don't remember what it does but if that's all maybe it's not a problem at all? I don't know!

If nothing else, it should be the 600x220 version that the program actually outputs, and not the 300x110 downscale displayed right now.

If it's from the program itself then I guess it might be more justified (thinking about it more) but I don't know.

Anyway, I won't argue the point - that's for someone else to decide.

Yes. And that's not my place either! It was just a friendly FYI.

Also, one suggestion for development workflow: does GitHub actions' environment have all the packages needed for building the website? If so, you could make a workflow that builds it, then commits all the HTML files to a separate branch (e.g., gh-pages, sharing no common commits with master). Then, you can have it so the website is generated automatically and deterministically after every commit, while keeping version history and without changing the local dev workflow.

It should have everything but I think (though I don't know) it can't do that because it's in a separate container. Also it might not be the best idea.

What do you think @lcn2? We were careful with designing it and there might be problems here (including some unforeseen problems?)? But then again I don't believe it's even possible (but I could be wrong).

Better get going! Every moment I can focus is precious and I have things I must do and other things I want to do (like reading)! Have a brilliant day, both of you (or else evening though I know it's early morning where Landon is)!