A Trip Down Memory Lane
As hard as it is to believe, codestore used to have a Flash intro movie (as above). I find out what I don't like the hard way - by using stuff. There were even frames at one point!
I mentioned yesterday that there had been 4 previous versions of this site. What I didn't realise is that I actually still have them all in NSF format. Oh, the joy. Come and revel in my past mistakes.
Click on any of the screen-grabs to see that version in action.
Release date: May 1998
What can I say, I was pulling out all the stops with this one, wasn't I! Back then it was really cool to have.full.stops.in.stuff and maybe even a : where it wasn't needed. This version was never actually available online, as I remember. Codestore.net was yet to be registered and the database was shared mainly with colleagues on the intranet.
- Worked in Notes and browser
- Framesets!
- Way too many images where text would have sufficed.
- Content copyright of some company called FDM Group. Don't ask!
- Animated GIF logo, featuring the Wingdings font. Nice.
- Popup Search results
Release date: ~March 2000
Starting to look more like the version we're all used to. Although I'd started using Macromedia Fireworks a little too aggressively.
- First to go online at codestore.net
- Dropped Framesets
- Introduced Flash intro movie
- Started using the "codestore blue" you're probably so familiar with now.
Release date: ~September 2000
Now, I remember this one being around for a little longer than its predecessors. It was this release that saw me start writing actual in-depth, full-length articles - with images and everything. Up till this point it had mainly been little code snippets I'd "borrowed" from elsewhere.
- Search Results in same page
- Dropped "support" for Notes client and became web-only.
- Multi-lingual "Send To A Friend" link feature
- Added ability to comment on articles
- Printer-friendly Alternative Page
Release date: ~March 2001
- First version to include the then cutting-edge blog.
- Introduced a new logo in the same font and style that's stuck until now.
Release date: July 2002
Without doubt the version that has stuck around the longest. Two and a half years so far!
- Dropped tables for layout and started using CSS.
- Added ability to search and comment on blogs.
Release date: Spring 2005
This version will probably be the one most people recognise as codestore, as it lasted for about 4 years. Must have worked as I never really saw the need to change. That said, bits were added over the years. It was just the skin that stayed the same.
- Made more accessible
- Simplified navigation
- Improved Search functionality
- Download section
Release date: Winter 2009
Four whole years have passed since v6!! How that flew. In that time Web 1.0 became Web 2.0. Time to catch up!
- Lightweight semantic HTML
- User Gravatars
- Survey feature?
- New look?
- Indented blog commenting?
Skip to the 
You can subscribe to an individual
Great trip down memory lane! I'd been hoping you'd do something like this!
I remember first finding Codestore at version 3 and haven't stopped comming back, even if most of my developement is centred on the client rather than the web.
OK, I give up...What was the addition to the image in the previous post? something to do with the blue highlighting or the new server?
It's the cross Brett.
An easy way to tidy up those bookmarks!
How cool is that !! :)
As far as I remember, I came along with this site with the version 4 (2001) :)
Looking good.
Any chance of writing an article of RSS-feeds in Domino?
I love all the old cliches!!
I did everything just the same when I started..
Like the fady HTML and javascript images so the site looks all techy...
Wonderful..
Cool to see the old version. Do you do your own graphic design?
I've still the version you supplied to us before codestore was a website !!
I loved version 4. I still prefer it to the current one t.b.h.
Nice litte look back in time thought - cheers!
noon. Try Notestips - {Link}
Trent. Yes. Easy really.
Stephen. I hope you're not still using it as any kind of best-practice example ;-) If so, you might want to ask for your money back from FDM Group plc.
Thanks for the tour. I didn't find Codestore till the current version, so seeing the previous works is interesting. Kind of a baseline for steady improvements.
Suggestion for search improvement: (I'm thinking of doing this myself) - show comments indented along with the parent article instead of scattershot as the search results from Domino tend to display... while showing the parent article even if the search term only appears in the comments.... would require some clear visual way to show what is and what is not a search result, but it would make things a heck of a lot more useful on search result pages, IMHO....
Nice idea Jerry. Let me know if you manage this. Something tells me we'll be somewhat limited in what we can achieve, when using the standard Notes searching features. I hope not.
@Jerry & Jake:
A Blog and it's Comments are as one. They may consist programmatically of several Notes documents, but it is one discussion on one subject. Ideally they should be indexed as one document. This would lead to just one hit in the search results, nomatter if a searchterm if found in the text of the Blog or it's Comments
Laurens. I think Jerry was talking about articles and their comment, rather than blog entries. With articles, the comment themselves can be as important as and quite distinct from the actual parent article.
Quite right both of you. My main issue is that when comment documents are included in search results, they're disconnected from the subject. You've got the exact essence of the overall thought, Laurens - they are as one. Putting it all in context in search results that make sense is what we're after.
I have a feeling it will involve some trickery Jake. Either a custom index or some sort of data mirroring across documents... or, shudder, a java agent.
I've actually done this and it's not so bad but it requires full text indexing and if you want results ordered on relativity you have to do it yourself, which I did figure out. I guess I should get off my bum and write the article on this I've been meaning to put together. :-)