I think the structure is ok, but prefer having Downloads and Documentation at the top level. But instead of the previous structure, still organise based on package, so:

Documentation
  Hawkular Server (link)
    Quick Start
    ...
  Hawkular APM (link)
    ...
  Hawkular Metrics (link)
    ...
  Hawkular Clients
    Libraries
      Java
      ...
    Clients
      ...

and similar for downloads. So top level is similar to first structure, but second tier is organised by package rather than book (in terms of docs).

Regards
Gary


----- Original Message -----

> Sorry, I meant to sent the PNG file... here it is
>
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 8:08 PM, Thomas Heute < theute@redhat.com > wrote:
>
>
>
> Based on that suggestion, here is another proposal.
>
> Rectangle means a page
> Underline is more likely a section on a page
> Green arrows mean links (To Travis, to gitbook.io...)
>
> Let me know what you think of that updated section
>
> Thomas
>
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 10:32 PM, Stefan Negrea < snegrea@redhat.com > wrote:
>
>
>
> I do not see the idea proposed yet, but why not structure the website around
> major projects? We have Hawkular community, Hawkular Services, Hawkular
> Metrics, and APM. Projects like Inventory or the clients would fall under
> Hawkular Services umbrella. So rather than designing a generic structure
> with everything make individual sub-sites and then apply the structure you
> proposed.
>
> The current website was designed when the direction of the community was
> different so a re-org along the previous structure is not sufficient.
>
> Thank you,
> Stefan Negrea
>
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 12:08 PM, Michael Burman < miburman@redhat.com >
> wrote:
>
>
> Currently Heapster stores in internal memory few minutes of data and allows
> queries that request this data (through its REST-interface). The consume
> part will just request the data from the HWKMETRICS instead.
>
> - Micke
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Thomas Heute" < theute@redhat.com >
> To: "Discussions around Hawkular development" < hawkular-dev@lists.jboss.org
> >
> Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2016 4:09:40 PM
> Subject: Re: [Hawkular-dev] Hawkular.org
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 3:06 PM, Michael Burman < miburman@redhat.com >
> wrote:
>
>
> Consumers is terrible word for any client, as they both consume as well as
> produce the data.
>
> Well that was actually reflecting the current state, we have "things" that
> feed data to the server and "things" that consume data from the server. The
> client libraries provide an API to feed and consume.
>
>
> For example for Heapster, we currently produce the data, however at the
> moment I'm creating a change that will consume the data from HWKMETRICS.
>
> Why does it consume data now ?
>
> Thomas
>
>
>
>
> Integration / clients is far more used and known word, while
> consumer/producer is something more specific and implies a design pattern.
>
> - Micke
>
> _______________________________________________
> hawkular-dev mailing list
> hawkular-dev@lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hawkular-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> hawkular-dev mailing list
> hawkular-dev@lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hawkular-dev
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> hawkular-dev mailing list
> hawkular-dev@lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hawkular-dev
>
_______________________________________________
hawkular-dev mailing list
hawkular-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hawkular-dev