[bug#59822] [PATCH guix-artwork] website: base: home: Add 'DOWNLOAD LATEST' button.

["pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" <pelzflorian@pelzflorian.de>]

Yes (’s patch was merely about discoverability of the latest installer
page, that already exists.  Also the latest installer page has a warning
that points users to the standard installer.  So we could push

diff --git a/website/apps/base/templates/home.scm b/website/apps/base/templates/home.scm
index 7b72da8..26d07cd 100644
--- a/website/apps/base/templates/home.scm
+++ b/website/apps/base/templates/home.scm
@@ -109,6 +109,11 @@ languages (EDSLs) to "
         #:url (guix-url "download/")
         #:light #true)
        " " ; A space for readability in non-CSS browsers.
+       ,(button-big
+         #:label (C_ "button" "DOWNLOAD LATEST")
+         #:url (guix-url "download/latest/")
+         #:light #true)
+       " "
        ,(button-big
          #:label (C_ "button" "CONTRIBUTE")
         #:url (guix-url "contribute/")

--

But then, shouldn’t we tell users there are bugs in the standard image and
they better use latest?

Could we maybe wait until such reasons pop up for 1.4.0?  Or have a new
standard installer independent of the Guix release?

Mathieu will know better, but I think there were few issues with 1.3.0
(UUID checks in commit f5d9d6ec68f78f5651bd5a698f489ab57bf77d5d) but
latest has better logging.  On the other hand, the latest installer had
few new bugs except missing mkfs.ext4.

> Therefore, I still propose on the webpage <https://guix.gnu.org/en/download/>
> to add this sentence:
>
> These images are well-tested released images, and since Guix follows
> rolling release model, the [latest development images are
> here](https://guix.gnu.org/en/download/latest/).

Why mention rolling release?

> To me, this patch is orthogonal to release 1.4.  Well, if you think it
> is better to apply after the publication of the release, that’s fine. :-)

Indeed timing isn’t very relevant.

Regards,
Florian